MovieChat Forums > durkkouglas > Replies
durkkouglas's Replies
<blockquote>I have a similar reaction to Sam Harris. I remember seeing Sam on the Bill Maher show when he got into the mother or all bad ideas debate on Islam with Ben Affleck and I instantly agreed with him</blockquote>
Ben Affleck was right though, Sam Harris was being a racist tool
You mad bro?
<blockquote>old PET Computer screen sitting in the center of the room, surrounded by 1,000 white Xmas lights,</blockquote>
Please, submit your production design storyboard as to how YOU would have designed the room. Clearly your artistic vision is so much superior to everyone who worked on the film, and you're totally not just being a nit-picky pedant about details that don't conform to <i>your</i> narrowminded cinematic world view.
<blockquote>Lights, buttons and switches...(multi-colored and/or blinking) double for technology.</blockquote>
Amazing. So evidently in this strange little world where you live, computer server rooms <i>don't</i> have any switches or blinking, flashing lights whatsoever? Let me see the server you've constructed?
<blockquote>trying to forecast what future technology will look like</blockquote>
What makes you think Alien is trying to "forecast" anything? Do you even understand the universe or viewpoint of the film? Didn't think so.
<blockquote>Ha ha</blockquote>
Are you laughing at yourself at this point, or just shit-posting for fun?
<blockquote>FWIW, you stayed in it longer than I would have ;)</blockquote>
Probably because, like your buddy up there, you have no clue what you're talking about and don't have any case to support your weak argument.
<blockquote>If they built the Nostromo *today*, would the computer systems look like they do in Alien?</blockquote>
Er... yes, it would. See the above pictures I posted as an example. The cockpit of the Nostromo looks pretty much <b>exactly</b> like the control room or cockpit of any large commercial or military vehicle like a place or submarine.
<blockquote>if what we're building Today is light-years beyond/different from what's shown in the movie</blockquote>
Except it's not "light years" beyond/different. Stop hyperboling.
<blockquote>it should be clear to any reasonable person that Alien got it wrong.</blockquote>
And please, enlighten us with your genius intellect as to where or even how Alien "got it wrong"?
<blockquote>Notice how flat, touch screens are all over the place now. You don't see any CRTs anymore.</blockquote>
I don't use touch screens at my job. They're certainly not "all over the place." Maybe in a corporate job it makes sense to have them. Not on a floating mining rig.
<blockquote>Also ... keyboards are going away, except for touchpads, and even they are becoming 2-D cheap bubble buttons</blockquote>
The keyboard was invented in 1868. It's 2020, and we're still using them. It's certainly not impossible to believe that we would still be using them a few decades into the future as well. At least when performing a dangerous task like piloting a spaceship, you wouldn't want any finicky or gimmicky controls that rely on touch technology. Buttons have much more utility and are safer.
As for the complaints about the MUTHUR control room and the steam venting in the ship and their compression suits, I didn't find any of it to be distracting. Even today, people are going to be using keyboards to access a supercomputer. Nothing out of the ordinary.
I have no problem with people criticizing a film when it <i>makes sense.</i> Attacking a film because it doesn't "look pretty enough," however, is just a stupid, lazy, contrived point that is utterly worthless to anyone serious about film criticism. It's clear the guy just brought it up because he loves the sound of his own voice, and otherwise has nothing of value to add to the discussion (as evidenced by his rage quitting the debate).
<blockquote>This perception about the ancient technology used in 300 years on space ship seems perfectly obvious and reasonable</blockquote>
Alien does <b>not</b> take place 300 years in the future. If you're going to assess a film, at least get the facts right.
<blockquote> and yet there are people who are as mechanical as robots ( who knows maybe they are robots ) that swoop in and start a fight </blockquote>
Exactly. He swooped in and started a fight with me, insulting me because I didn't kowtow to his ridiculous claims. The problem is that people feel the need to act like mini-Roger Eberts and pretend they are some masters of critiquing art when they're anything but.
<blockquote>low end IT in 2020 gives you more options for things like input</blockquote>
I didn't see the characters having any problems with lack of "options for things like input." You're trying to manufacture a problem where there isn't one. Thank God you weren't on the production design team.
<blockquote>More colors, more detail = easier to read and to display information, for example.</blockquote>
Again, that's subjective. The Nostromo are not suburbanites who need fancy displays or UIs. They're miners. They can accomplish their objectives of running the ship perfectly well with the software they have. So far you have failed to articulate a single objective, plausible advantage this would have had for the characters in the film.
<blockquote> I'm punching out and putting you on ignore, so I'm not tempted to continue. I have a bad habit of getting into long arguments like this with silly people.Waste of time.</blockquote>
As I suspected, you have no point to stand on so have given up after throwing a hissy fit. I never asked for you to reply to me either. All I know is your argument was bogus.
<blockquote>certainly outdated in the year this movie takes place in</blockquote>
I'm not sure you understand what the term "outdated" means. Certainly not in the context that you're arguing.
<blockquote>There's a reason you don't see computers today, in 2020, using text based UIs</blockquote>
Oh really? Is that why I literally use the same text based UIs whenever I do any serious work? Ever heard of Python or cmd.exe? You have no clue what you're talking about.
<blockquote>Putting that kind of IT on a ship built around 2100 would absolutely be reverting to old technology.</blockquote>
And again I have to explain, nothing was "reverted." <b>In the universe of the movie</b> the technology is current. Stop being purposefully obtuse.
<blockquote>Not on a sub built in 2010 (another point you're refusing to accept),</blockquote>
What <i>point</i> is that? All you've done is dodge the original point, which is that the pictures you showed of a modern submarine control room look <b>pretty much exactly the same</b> as the Nostromo's. Does your back hurt from moving those goal posts?
<blockquote>A more modern UI isn't just prettier, it's easier to use</blockquote>
Subjective. I work with an outdated UI at my current job and I found it easy to use once I was trained on it. The Nostromo, likewise, doesn't need fancy bells and whistles to do their very menial job.
<blockquote>They would absolutely not, no way in hell, be using that sort of monochrome monitor with IT that could only manage very simple by 2020 standards line graphics to display things like navigation charts, IT that relies on a text based UI when even very cheap, low end IT in 2020 gives you more options for things like input.</blockquote>
Wrong, because by the logic of the film, they very well <i>are</i> using that "outdated" monochrome monitor and "standard line" graphics. Again, you're nitpicking, and you don't even know what your point is. Please explain exactly how having "fancier graphics" would have affected their mission or their ability to navigate? They seemed to accomplish everything just fine. No where did the ship's technology fail them.
Most Republicans got where they are through racist policies. It's not rocket science. Democrats are only marginally better. Saying you're better than a Democrat is setting the bar real low.
<blockquote>they aren't going to revert back to tech that became obsolete 100 years ago.</blockquote>
They're not "reverting" back to anything. They're not using smoke signals. They're using advanced computers to pilot a starship. Just because it doesn't look advanced to your nit-picky eyes doesn't mean it isn't.
<blockquote>Also, modern IT would be easier to use, relay data more efficiently-I'm not rehashing all the reasons.</blockquote>
Considering you never gave any "reasons" in the first place, I wouldn't expect you to go out of your way to actually bolster your argument. At the end of the day, the Nostromo's technology *is* easy to use *for* *the* *characters.* NO where in the film were they hampered by their IT being "outdated," as you describe, other than the fact they were piloting an old tug boat that was probably on its way to being decommissioned. At the end of the day, it got the job done.
<blockquote>This whole thread is about the technology and whether it seems believable... So shitting on me for a "nitpick" about the IT in the movie doesn't make much sense.</blockquote>
Except it *is* believable. It accomplishes everything it needs to in the film's universe. Again, you're complaining about aesthetics that most people aren't even going to notice. Again, you might as well complain that the Nostromo looks like a model. You're trying to attack a diegetic issue as though it's non-diegetic.
<blockquote> where you made a mistake is fucking stupid</blockquote>
I didn't make any mistakes. Stop projecting and ad-homineming.
<blockquote>My point stands that even on a no frills industrial ship they wouldn't be using ancient IT with all the flaws I pointed out</blockquote>
Except it's not "ancient" in the universe of the film. Do you know anything about world building or verisimilitude? You're being an ignorant millenial and looking at everything from a 21st century lens.
Also, you're still ignoring the fact that the picture you showed of the "updated submarine cockpit" looks exactly like the Nostromo's. It's got square screens for relaying information, consoles with flashing buttons, and lots of tubes and wires. At the end of the day, functionality doesn't change that much. Your argument basically boils down to "the graphics on the screens aren't as fancy," which isn't much of an argument. IN the world of the film, it doesn't need to be. It conveys the basic information to the viewer to get the point across that they're using computers to run the ship. Computers that look pretty much the same as our own.
<blockquote> the only graphics aren't much more than line drawings.</blockquote>
And the graphics on any computer aren't just more than a bunch of dots, but when you put them together they convey images that our brain comprehends. What exactly is your point? The "graphics" get the job done. It's realistic that it would help them navigate through space.
<blockquote>which shows you that the IT in the more modern ship is probably more advanced.</blockquote>
The problem is you're trying to compare two real life things to fiction. The Nostromo is already far more advanced than any modern-day submarine. It can accomplish everything your example can and more. Next question.
<blockquote>I'm talking about how the information technology they are using in the movie works, what they are using on the ship.</blockquote>
THat's not apples and oranges, it's oranges and clementines. You realize that the information technology used in the film is also a "special effect" right? You're literally blaming the film's depiction of technology as being due to the lack of technology in the late 70s. Did you really expect them to implement GUIs for every computer in 1978? But at this point we're veering off topic into the behind-the-scenes aspects, which is irrelevant to the world and meaning of the film. IN the words of Roger Ebert, a film is only what it shows you and nothing more.
<blockquote>an X Wing was still an X Wing</blockquote>
An X wing has the advantage of not needing to be realistic. It's literally a Flash Gordon serial come to life. That's the real apples and oranges.
1. 1776 (1972)
2. The Patriot (2000)
3. The Devils Disciple (1959)
4. Benedict Arnold (2003)
5. John Paul Jones (1959)
6. April Morning (1988)
7. The Scarlet Coat (1955)
8. The Scarlet Letter (1979)
9. Drums Along the Mohawk (1939)
10. The Crossing (2000)
11. The Last of the Mohicans (1992)
12. Johnny Tremain (1957)
13. Revolution (1985)
He's still around? He hasn't been relevant nor had a hit for about 15 years now.
All I'm seeing are video screens (which the Nostromo has) and next to them are smaller screens with some pixels communicating information. Which the Nostromo has... it's just a bunch of boxey equipment and wiring. You're not getting very far with your point. If you're going to complain about the ship's computers "not having fancier graphics" then you might as well complain that the Alien wasn't CGI.
<blockquote>using a text based UI running on a monochrome CRT would just not happen.</blockquote>
So basically your complaints boil down to the fact they're using CRT monitors. THat's such a frivolous concern. At the end of the day, a computer is merely a means of relaying information visually, which is what the Nostromo's computers accomplish. Also they're clearly not just "text based" considering it gives them trajectories into LV-426's atmosphere, amongst other things, such as video feed. Basically, everything a modern computer would do. Just not as aesthetically pleasing to your eye. Which it wasn't supposed to be.
<blockquote>you aren't going to go back to old, obsolete technology like a monochrome CRT with disadvantages like being bulkier</blockquote>
It's... a... computer screen. It gets the job done. If such a nitpicky detail bothers you that much, squint your eyes and pretend it's a flatscreen. No one other than computer nerds care about that stuff, and I doubt such a person has any willing suspension of disbelief for any movie.
<blockquote> Why would they use a monitor that can't do more than crude line drawings when more advanced monitors can do so much more</blockquote>
THe monitors can already do more. See above. The point is that the computers get the job done and are not what's important to the film. You might as well complain about Sigourney Weaver's 80s hairdo, or them all smoking cigarettes on the ship.
<blockquote>It's just absurd, really.</blockquote>
Yes, your comment is pretty absurd. Your entire argument is based on aesthetics and not the actual function or logic.
THey practically look the same...
Not white privilege.