On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:13:36 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 24 Jun 2008 00:46:38 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>It must've been (sorry, been away a few days on holiday - didn't go
>>anywhere, just unplugged for a few days).
>>
>>
> A rest can be as good as a change :)

Indeed.  And the rest was good, think I might go and shoot some things in 
Perfect Dark again this evening.

>>But as Adams always was keen to say (paraphrasing), the brilliance of
>>Sci- Fi (or Sci-Fantasy, if you will)
> 
> What I will is SF, actually ;)

That works as well, covers both genres.  Most people conflate "Science 
Fiction" with "Science Fantasy".  Hardcore Sci-Fi people will tell you 
that something like H2G2 isn't Sci-Fi because it doesn't include a basis 
in science - it's basis is humour, set in space.

(I used to moderate a forum years and years ago on Science Fiction - very 
interesting mix of people).

>>is that it bypasses the optic nerve
>>entirely, meaning you can do *whatever* you want; if it's written well
>>enough, the audience can imagine it better than any SFX house could do
>>it.
>>
> My opinion exactly!

:-)

I must've misunderstood what you said (not uncommon for me), but I 
thought you said you didn't like radio drama...

Jim

Post a reply to this message