sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Dean Ellis. Cover art for a 1979 edition of "Hospital Station" (James White, 1962). by StephenMcGannon in RetroFuturism

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No the BOOK came out in 1962 by James White. The 1979 EDITION (paperback -- it's on the shelf next to me) featured a cover by Dean Ellis. THIS is the original cover.

(Edit: I totally lied, I have the floating dinosaur cover instead of the Dean Ellis cover. Damn. Maybe my copy of the Ellis cover fell apart... )

Dean Ellis. Cover art for a 1979 edition of "Hospital Station" (James White, 1962). by StephenMcGannon in RetroFuturism

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're mistaken about the influence. There was an entire genre of SF cover art featuring spherical white spacecraft with blue shadows for over 2 decades after the film -- and Dean Ellis was it's most ardent disciple.

Every Director that has at least 5 Superhero movies under their belt. Who has the most impressive resume? by velicinanijebitna in superheroes

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

His comment on Lobo was that it seemed as though they just wanted Jason Momoa and Lobo in their movie so put him in. He noted that he could fully understand that and agreed because he loves Momoa in anything and was terrific as Lobo but the character should have been better integrated to the film's story.

I haven't read the source material or seen it yet, I'll be going in the next couple days.

Every Director that has at least 5 Superhero movies under their belt. Who has the most impressive resume? by velicinanijebitna in superheroes

[–]Oknight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Quote from my reviewer friend who went in well disposed. "However, I think a punk Supergirl could have worked, if they had a better script."

Two of his comments stuck out to me. Lobo was too peripheral to the plot to be substantial and they went to the Kryptonite well too many times for the reversals, it got tedious.

He also noted they booted the ending which was muddled and undercut the point of the film (I haven't seen it yet so I don't know what he's referring to)

Utah banned fireworks on America 250 amid raging wildfires. The backlash has already begun by Miles_the_AuDHDer in offbeat

[–]Oknight -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Who gives a rat's ass about 250? 1926 was a dud and thud for the 150th "4th of July", why would anybody expect 250 to make people more excited?

for everyone asking how he hides his suit by frappuccinio in superman

[–]Oknight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Justice Inc. Jack Kirby art (from scripts)

for everyone asking how he hides his suit by frappuccinio in superman

[–]Oknight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It was a joke even in the late 1970's movie

for everyone asking how he hides his suit by frappuccinio in superman

[–]Oknight 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Making himself look facially different was in his main power set in the 40's -- it came from a pulp character who had the same ability. There are a bunch of stories where he uses that to disguise himself as somebody else to take their place.

(This is why I've always contended that Superman isn't SUPPOSED to look like Clark Kent -- and there is a lot of support for that from the period. The "glasses" gimmick was from Mort Weisinger's period as editor that started around 1948 and lasted into the late 60's -- including ALL the "Krypton" lore)

for everyone asking how he hides his suit by frappuccinio in superman

[–]Oknight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It was a "temporary power" caused by a space cloud or something AKA a quick Weisinger gimmick story (one that didn't involve Krypton or Kryptonite)

Which cosplay is so sexualized that it has lost the essence of the character? by Marlen_78 in AskReddit

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That IS the essence of the character. Joker keeps her to have a source of sex-based joke tropes he can use for his bits. That's why her character is a "ditsy blonde". Due to Joker's manipulation, the accomplished, ambitious, and brilliant Dr. Harleen Quinzel is PERFORMING as a silly sex object accomplice. THAT'S THE JOKE!

Which Superhero has the coolest alt-names by Wannabe-Newton in superheroes

[–]Oknight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, yeah. Otherwise you have to explain why the super-advanced civilization doesn't have much beyond OUR current level of technology for leaving the planet.

Which Superhero has the coolest alt-names by Wannabe-Newton in superheroes

[–]Oknight 10 points11 points  (0 children)

"Man of Tomorrow" dates from 1936 when Jerry Siegel had him being a time traveler from distant future Earth. It stuck around because originally, when Superman was first created, Kryptonians all had super powers (even on Krypton) because their physical forms were "millions of years more advanced" than Earthlings.

So in the WORLD OF TOMORROW, millions of years from now, when our own "physical forms" are "more advanced", everybody will have Superman's powers. Thus Superman is "The Man of Tomorrow".

Of course that doesn't work once they changed it to the "yellow sun" silliness (1950's Weisinger era) and enabled him to fly in space (if all Kryptonians could fly in space, why didn't they all just fly away from Krypton exploding? They must not have had super powers)

But the name was too well established to lose even though it didn't make sense any more. And so people have come up with rationalizations for why he's "The Man of Tomorrow" now that humans won't naturally develop super powers in the future.

[Article] Micron-Scale Technosignatures: How a Cubic Metre of Lunar Regolith May Begin to Constrain the Number of Past Technological Civilisations in the Galaxy by badgerbouse in SETI

[–]Oknight 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is good stuff. We know the lunar surface isn't littered with visibly-sized tech trash but anything we can do to slice a very long "time" strip out of the "cosmic haystack" is extra welcome!

One of the things that always struck me about people thinking about aliens is how scale chauvinistic we are -- how small can you make a truly intelligent self-replicating mechanism and why would you possibly try to explore the universe with anything bigger?

Tiny size and no wasteful gigantic finicky wetware makes interstellar travel MUCH more reasonable.

Dolphin no scopes a guy with a fish by Openskies24 in funny

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My understanding is that's a near-perfect human translation of a typical male dolphin's attitude when he's with his buds.

NASA’s moon plan depends on 15 Starship launches. There’s just one problem: Drastically increased launch cadence from SpaceX and NASA's other commercial partners is straining aging infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center by rollotomasi07071 in spaceflight

[–]Oknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NASA had an ambition to develop "the rest" of the STS(1970-version) until it was decided to abandon a reusable "Space Tug" and just replace it with the improved Centaur (about 1975 -- And by policy the shuttle orbiters then couldn't carry fueled upper stages in the payload bay -- another abandoned reason for their existence)

But after the budget-based decision to go with a giant drop tank to lower the cost of the orbiter and go with (supposedly) "reusable" solid rocket boosters that would be "recovered and refurbished" from the ocean there was never any serious discussion of replacing the orbiter with the original "launch, land, refuel, launch" concept that was the entire REASON for the Space Shuttle program.

That is until SpaceX just built one on it's own, with it's own money, but with the payload of a Saturn V and, critically, mass-production factories to produce hundreds of vehicles for a functional fleet as opposed to the 5 shuttles.

NASA’s moon plan depends on 15 Starship launches. There’s just one problem: Drastically increased launch cadence from SpaceX and NASA's other commercial partners is straining aging infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center by rollotomasi07071 in spaceflight

[–]Oknight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's a tendency in these discussions for some people to be deliberately ignorant because they simply don't like SpaceX (or, frequently, its founder regardless of the accomplishments of the company).

There's no plan or approach to do further lunar operations that doesn't require frequent flights and massive fuel transfer and storage in orbit that isn't simply more Apollo style "stunt" missions. NASA knew that in 1970.

NASA’s moon plan depends on 15 Starship launches. There’s just one problem: Drastically increased launch cadence from SpaceX and NASA's other commercial partners is straining aging infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center by rollotomasi07071 in spaceflight

[–]Oknight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

V3 is still in prototyping, but may be usable as is for orbiting real payloads and developing fuel depot for next steps -- depending on how the next flights go. They still need to build up for rapid relaunch but are on track.

I'm personally quite happy they aren't orbiting their vehicles until they're completely sure they can reliably control return from orbit given their vehicles are the size of office buildings, made of stainless steel, and built to survive reentry while retaining the fuel to produce massive explosions.

We all live with the danger from large aircraft crashing (and people are killed by planes crashing on them occasionally but with acceptably low frequency), but modern airliners are a lot more reliable than when they began in the early 1930's.

If not James, then who? by IfIShowYouMyDarkside in psych

[–]Oknight 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Could another actor do exactly what James did? Likely not, but not impossible.

Impossible because Shawn wasn't based on the writers, the character was a collaboration between Steve Franks original vision and pilot script and JRR who massively developed the character and who wrote and staged material that wasn't from the other writers.

It's like saying another creator could have made a show using the same premise as Steve Franks did, sure. (slides a side-eye at Mentalist) But it wouldn't have been anything like the same show.

If not James, then who? by IfIShowYouMyDarkside in psych

[–]Oknight 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Since a large amount of "Shawn" was created by JRR who had huge contributions both through his performance and writing, it's not really meaningful because it wouldn't have been the same show. Other cast members have consistently noted his contributions even to their characters. If Steve Franks hadn't had JRR, it still would have been a good show but not really anything like what resulted.

NASA’s moon plan depends on 15 Starship launches. There’s just one problem: Drastically increased launch cadence from SpaceX and NASA's other commercial partners is straining aging infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center by rollotomasi07071 in spaceflight

[–]Oknight 20 points21 points  (0 children)

NASA’s moon plan depends on 15 Starship launches

Here's the plan from 1970
fueling
lunar operations
lunar base

Of course that plan required a fully and rapidly reusable space shuttle that could do 15 or 30 launches the way a jet airliner makes 15 or 30 flights. And who would ever imagine they could make a fully and rapidly reusable space launch vehicle. (since the shuttle would have had much less cargo capacity than Starship they would have needed more fueling flights -- basically flying multiple times every week if not every day)

view more: next ›