Conference noted::sf

    [This is from _TV Guide_.]
    
    More than a year after it went into production, and months after its
    completion last May, one of the most expensive TV-movies ever made is
    still waiting for an air date.  But, says executive producer Lee
    Zlotoff, Disney's futurisitic $8-million movie, "Plymouth," is finally
    expectec to air on ABC early next year.
    
    "Plymouth," originally designed as a serious pilot that failed to make
    the cut for the fall season, is the story of a small town that's
    relocated from Earth to the moon.  "Everything that's done in the movie
    is absolutely feasible," says Zlotoff.  There will be some speculative
    plot elements, though.  "It's unclear if a child born on the moon would
    ever be able to return to the Earth, because its heart and lungs
    develop differently.  That becomes a major issue in the film."
                    
    Zlotoff denies that the movie is propaganda for the aerospace industry,
    even though Lockheed has put $500,000 into it, and other companies
    including General Motors cooperated extensively.  "They saw an
    opportunity here of promoting space," says Zlotoff.  "They had no
    script involvement."  -- _Stephan Galloway_

    Has this movie aired yet or has it been aired at all?  I've heard
    nothing about this movie.  Does anyone know anything about this? The
    last reply said it was suppose to come out sometime early this year but
    I haven't heard anything about it.

Article        31188
From: HIGGINS@FNAL.BITNET (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Moonbase movie *Plymouth* to air Sunday?
Date: 23 May 91 07:20:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
 
Here's a tip.  I just heard a rumor that the made-for-TV movie
*Plymouth* will be broadcast on NBC this coming Sunday.  I don't know
how accurate this rumor is-- but if it's true, catch it!  The director
made a presentation at last year's Space Development Conference,
showing slides of the sets and characters.
 
*Plymouth* is about a near-future community of a few hundred people on
the Moon.  The filmmakers went to some trouble to tell a hard-science
story with plausible tech.  The director had really boned up. The
people he got as advisors-- such as moonbase maven Dr. Wendell Mendell
of NASA, or space artist Pat Rawlings of Science Applications
International-- were the same people I would have gotten.  I was
amazed to hear this Hollywood guy spout all the same technical jargon
as I'd heard at professional astronautics conferences.  The colony's
main export is helium-3, and it makes extensive use of local lunar
resources.  The designs of equipment, vehicles, and buildings are
quite convincing.  Hard science is almost never done well in
Televisionland, but this movie appears to be an exception.
 
*Plymouth* was intended to be a pilot for a TV series, but didn't get
picked up by the network.  The quality of the drama is unknown to me.
If it's a mediocre story, like *Destination Moon* or *Die Frau im
Mond*, the movie should be watchable because its technical background
is strong.  (No flames, please; how many SF movies have you sat
through with interesting plots, or intriguing characters, and lousy,
lousy science?)  If the story is good, you might be *really* pleased
you tuned it in.
 
     O~~*           /_) ' / /   /_/ '  ,   ,  ' ,_  _           \|/
   - ~ -~~~~~~~~~~~/_) / / /   / / / (_) (_) / / / _\~~~~~~~~~~~zap!
 /       \                          (_) (_)                    / | \
 |       |     Bill Higgins   Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 \       /     Bitnet:     HIGGINS@FNALB.BITNET
   -   -       Internet:  HIGGINS@FNAL.FNAL.GOV
     ~         SPAN/Hepnet:      43011::HIGGINS

    The rumour is now fact, and I SAW it!  ;^)
    
    I enjoyed it immensely (I tend to like characters more than technology
    anyway), thought that the special effects were wonderfully low-key (I
    mean, you could TELL that a lot of work & $ went into it, but it didn't
    hit you over the head) and the acting was good.
    
    IS this going to be a series?  I doubt it (cost-wise), but they left so
    many questions unanswered!
    
    K.C.

    RE -.1
    
    I also saw Plymouth on Sunday.  I smells like a pilot to me.  The
    special effects were, at least, acurate.  I had some problems with
    their treatment of liquids in a .16G environment, but that is a
    personal nit.
    
    The premise is REALLY hokey, though.  Transfering all the inhabitants
    of an Oregon logging community to the moon because they destroyed their
    community.  UNless they radically changed some of the qualifications
    for astronaut, some of those characters would never have survived
    take-off.
    
    The actings was impressive.  I enjoyed the development of a central
    family idea.
    
    As far as it being to expensive to produce as a series, the sets (the
    most expensive part) and the matte effects are all completed. 
    Shouldn't cost any more to produce than, say, an episode of (gag)
    Cosby.
    
    

I saw this also on Sunday and so far I'm impressed.  It looks promising.  There
is room for a lot of development around the characters.  It looks to me
that its more human interest than action/adventure.  There's none of the
flashy SFX of Star Trek but that's ok.  This looks like a future that is 
attainable and more easily identifiable.  We could probably relate more to 
the characters here than in Star Trek where the future is much further away. 

re: .6

>   The premise is REALLY hokey, though.  Transfering all the inhabitants
>    of an Oregon logging community to the moon because they destroyed their
>    community.  UNless they radically changed some of the qualifications
>    for astronaut, some of those characters would never have survived
>    take-off.

I don't agree.  Its possible that in the next 50, 20 or even 10 years they
could solve some of the problems of space travel to the point where it would
be more comfortable for an average person.  After all look how quickly aviation
has advanced to the point where we have world wide air travel.  A span of 
maybe 40 or 50 years.
  
>    Shouldn't cost any more to produce than, say, an episode of (gag)
>    Cosby.

	I think Bill Cosby is alright!  But I was worried that this show
would turn into a "Brady Bunch in Space" kind of deal.  

ktlam...
 

    
    I did not think about some of the problems w/ liquid in the moon's
    gravity, but what about the solar flare?  
    
    How were they able to get ~20 mins warning before the thing hit?
    
    							-Andy
    

I have to disagree with the preceding praise.  I watched this to the
second commercial break, then gave up on it.  Maybe I'm spoiled because
I go to movies more than I watch TV, but this felt like a TV movie -- I
really couldn't take any more of the soap opera over the baby, and who
knew, and how they were going to find out, etc.  Further, they were
overly fond of their effects, dwelling far too much on things like the
docking collar, and wasting two intermediate shots of antennas on a
simple radio transmission.  What really forced me to switch off,
though, was the populace going absolutely nuts over a routine shuttle
landing being successful, something I felt not the slightest dramatic
tension over.  As a theorist once pointed out, TV is about wasting
time, while movies are about compressing it.

Someone please tell me there was deep SF meaning behind all this that I
didn't pick up on...

    Re: .9
    
    >Maybe I'm spoiled because
    >I go to movies more than I watch TV, but this felt like a TV movie 
    
    That is because this WAS a TV movie.  ;^)
    
    >Further, they were
    >overly fond of their effects, dwelling far too much on things like the
    >docking collar, and wasting two intermediate shots of antennas on a
    >simple radio transmission.  
    
    I dunno...I thought a lot of that was rather understated.  For
    instance; the docking collar bit, I think, was more of a "Will
    something go wrong with the docking?" than a show-off shot.
    
    >What really forced me to switch off,
    >though, was the populace going absolutely nuts over a routine shuttle
    >landing being successful, something I felt not the slightest dramatic
    >tension over.  
    
    I THINK that they were more excited about the fact that there were new
    arrivals, some old friends and relatives, landing safe.  It wasn't all
    THAT routine, remember...the community wasn't all that large, so there
    very well could still be a teeny element of danger.  Have you ever sat
    in an airline terminal, and seen some of the reactions there?  That is
    what it reminded me of.
    
    Mind you...I am not huge on pure SF (then what am I doing here, I hear
    you ask?  More for fantasy.) so I don't know how a "purist" would take
    all this.  These are not explanations...merely me own observations.  I
    won't tell you to change your mind.  :^)
    
    K.C.

My problem with the solar flare thing was that it would take "days" for the 
flare to reach Earth and the Moon.  The flares move out at a substantially 
slower rate that light.  If the flare was moving at 1 million mph it would still
take over 92 hour to get here.

I thought the show was 2 stars out of 4.  

BTW it will not be a series.  It was not picked up by any of the networks.  Not
flashy enough and for the most part boring.

Steve

    re .11
    
    I think they were more concerned with the radiation emmisions from the
    flare than the flair itself.  These *DO* travel at the speed of light.
    
    re 20 minutes warning.
    
    I believe this is even possible today.  I think that the sun gives off
    certain characteristics prior to a flare that would give an indication
    of direction and magnitude.
    
    As far as my consideration of "hokey", it may indeed be possible for
    substantial increases in technology to reduce the effects of escape
    velocity.  I realize that it is not the place of this show to develop
    answers for NASA (God only knows they could use it), and I realize that
    there has to be the ability for willing suspence of disbelief in order
    for a show to work, but I am a nit-picker at heart.
    
    

    
       My favorite thing about the show was that it was trying to make a
    point of it being feasible and the next logical thing for humanity to
    do, to establish a permanent off-Terra colony.  These days of paranoia
    over safety, while well appreciated by the people doing the exploring,
    drive the costs so high that we can hardly afford the little that we
    do.
    
       The settlers who landed on plymouth (rock, that is,) left with no
    guarantees or insurance policies, they took a chance. Same with
    explorers and pioneers for centuries.
    
       My hope is that maybe this show, which from what I saw sported no
    wild gadgetry or far-futurism will bring the sense of adventure,
    exploration and expansion into the general viewing public's minds so
    they realize to spend some of their money on rocket science is a good
    idea.  (unlikely, but it's worth trying, and maybe the series will have
    value in and of itself anyways...)
    
    					-mjg
    

    I could buy the idea of settling a town of ordinary folks on the
    Moon if there was already regular traffic to and from there.  After
    all, there were European fishermen going up and down the New England coast
    for decades before the Pilgrims landed.  Did they mention, say,
    military bases on the Moon or mining outposts?  What was the
    economic basis of the colony supposed to be?  /jlr

I missed the first 20-30 minutes, so i didn't get the origin of the colony.
What was the story there again (logging community??)?  What was "the company"
that some of the characters worked for (but not most of the colonists)?

Given the limitations of TV drama, i thought they did pretty well with the
characters and plot.  The doctor character (Matthewson?) was pretty good.  I
didn't see any of the glaringly obvious scientific gaffes that TV science
fiction is notorious for.
								paul

Well if radiation travels at the speed of light (which I do not believe it does)
then they would not know about the radiation until it got to Earth/Moon because
the light of the solar flare would be getting there at the same time.  The 
radiation that travels with the  flare travels at the same speed.  This is a
fact.  Next time you hear about a major flare they will tell you that we can
expect communication disruptions and a spectacular Aurora in a few days.  FWIW
it takes light 8.5 minutes to get form the sun to the Earth not 20 minutes.

better luck next time.

Steve

    Re .16
    
    There are several forms of radiation.  Electromagnetic radiation
    includes light, radio, X-rays, and photons, and of course moves at the
    speed of light.  But energetic protons, electrons and neutrons also go
    under the name "radiation" and move slower than light.  A flare from
    the sun includes, I believe, a variety of radiations, which arrive here
    in waves according to the mass of the constituent particles -- first
    photons (X-rays, mostly, along with the optical flare we observe), then
    energetic electrons, then the protons.  I don't believe there are many
    neutrons in the mix.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    re .16
    
    More nits:  The first thing to hit the moon would be the burst of Xray
    radiation (that which was responsible for knocking out the transmitter
    for the mining party).  Then other radiation (gamma, delta) would reach
    the moon soon afterwards.  The slower moving particles would arive
    within 15-20 minutes afterward.  These slower particles are the most
    dangerous to huan beings.
    
    re premise
    
    The basic premise was that these people were the occupants of a small
    logging community in Oregon called Plymouth.  One of the divisions of
    the company was involved in a nuclear accident at a plant outside of
    the town which permenantly irradiated the town.  The corporation
    evacuated the town in time and offered to pay restitution.  The
    townspeople wanted to stay together.  One of the other divisions of the
    corporation had a mining operation on the moon which had a real morale
    problem.  They decided to plae the inhabitants of the town on the moon
    for the mining operation.  End of premise.

The marvels of time(shift)-travel...

Watched my tape of this last night -- Not a bad tale all told, and it kept my
interest, which is more than I'd say for most TV movies.

There did seem to be a real awareness of the dangers of being in 'space', and
an emphasis on the technology which would/will be necessary in order to 
manage such a venture.  I also liked the 'relocation of nuke-meltdown victims'
premise -- seems the most logical way a mining operation would get expanded
into civilization (given that the military will continue to act as if THEY
owned space as long as private industry of some sort allows them to...!)

All in all, a pleasant diversion with some food for thought....

    From a health perspective on radiation not ingesteed or inhaled,
    gamma and x-ray are the most penetrating and the most dangerous to
    tissue/genetic material and require extensive, high-density
    shielding.  Alpha, beta and other partical radiation (what is
    delta?) cause damage related to their energy, but most can be
    stopped by relatively thin shielding and density can be quite low
    (a few sheets of paper can stop alpha radiation from naturally
    decaying fissionable materials while it might take an eighth or
    quarter inch aluminum plate to block the output from a partical
    accelerator). The colonists should have been in no physical danger
    from particulate radiation inside their buildings/suits.

    Mike

    RE delta radiation
    
    This radiation is the damaging effect of sitting too long in front of a
    VDU.  I, of course, meant beta and alpha.  The mind went into complete
    restart.

    Well, I don't know if I'm unique in my opinions, but I'll take a shot.
    
    First, the technical quality of the science and sets was first-rate.
    I don't think that predicting solar flare activity is improbable, and
    certainly has received more debate than justified.
    
    Second, I think the plot was relatively implausible. You can't take
    a set of people at random and train them all to be space age lunar
    colonists. Elderly folks (like the mayor, for example) are notorius
    for being unable to work a VCR, and you're proposing to train them
    to operate life support equipment? I doubt it. I really doubt it.
    
    Third, the plot is pure soap opera nonsense. The ramblin'-cowboy
    knocks up a schoolmarm scenario again, and again, and again...
    
    Forth, the heroine is so politically correct she squeaks. Does she
    have any human faults at all? Does she have even the slightest grain
    of a sense of humor?  Does nuclear disaster followed by lunar
    deportation plus the strain of raising the Brady Bunch subject her
    to the least amount of stress? Why no! In fact, she has kids in their
    twenties, is sleeping with a TopGun pilot in his twenties, and manages
    to avoid menopause and become pregnant, with every hair in place and
    butter not melting in her mouth. I beg your pardon?
    Oh, I forgot to mention she had time to go to med school and become a
    doctor while raising all these kids alone. Sure, you bet.
    
    Why is it only me who finds this ludicrous?
    
    Why is it only me who is revolted by the obvious pandering to the
    values of the aging yuppie population?
    
    Frankly, "Plymouth" stank. (stinks, stank, has stunk?)
    

    Re: .22
    
    NONE of her children were in their 20's!  The oldest (daughter) was
    about, maybe, 18 or 19, the next (son) was about 15, then the other
    daughter, about 11 or 12, and then there was the youngest son.
    
    I also didn't think that the "Top Gun" Pilot was in his early 20's. 
    Late 20's, early 30's, yes.  But so what if he was younger than her? 
    Her character could have been about 40, and my own mother had a child
    at 40.  Menopause doesn't hit just then.
    
    If you don't like the movie, fine.  I'll respect that.  But be fair.
    
    K.C.

    I caught the middle of this on tape.  In terms of SF this is,
    frankly, boring.  Hey, we're THIRTY YEARS into the space age! 
    There are college graduates who weren't even born when people walked
    on the Moon!  There's been a space station flying by overhead for
    about a decade now.  Lunar colonization just isn't a big deal as
    an SF theme any more.  
    
    You might as well have stories about machines that were so smart
    they could play tournament-level chess.   Or how about a war
    fought with rockets and robot airplanes?   Or telephones that you
    can carry with you everywhere?  Or dictatorships being overthrown
    by free and open telecomm?  These could all have been SF
    stories forty or fifty years ago, but they're mundane now.
    
    /jlr

re: .24

>		Lunar colonization just isn't a big deal as
>    an SF theme any more.  
    
Maybe it's not original, but the theme can certainly be updated to
reflect our new "era of limits" here on earth.  All the other plots
you mention are things which have actually happened.  I don't see any
colonies on the Moon or Mars, however, and there's precious little
likelihood that we'll see any in the next decade (if not MUCH longer).
The challenges are no longer technological but economic.  The Russian
and American empires are breaking up, and the wealth that they were
able to pour into military and space ventures is no longer available.

re: .23

My guess is the daughter was around 17.  BTW i knew a woman in college
who was dirt poor, had detached retina problems, AND was a single
mother.  She's a practicing MD today and is under 40 by a couple of
years.  (So, for whoever the earlier writer was to complain about the
dreaded "yuppyism" of it all, don't be too quick to stereotype!)

								paul

RE:  -.2

Moon colony too hackneyed an idea?

Maybe the problem was, the story was only using the Moon locale on an
allegorical level (the way many modern SF writers use the "ordinary-day-
with-a-twist" to say something more profound?) -- that the REAL story
was about relocation, and alien environments and adapting to them, and
finding out it's 'about the same wherever you go'...

Just a thought...    (;>?)

- Steve

    I finally got around to watching the tape, and while I had a few
    problems with the technical details (the 'spin table', the orbital
    dynamics, the gravity, the 'shelter', the rain), and the story was a
    bit overblown and hokey, there was something about the movie....  I'm
    not sure they could make a decent series out of it, though I'd like to
    see them try.  I'm going to keep the tape, it was definately worthwhile
    even if you did have to forgive a lot.  I guess it was: "Hey, these
    people are _living_ on the moon!", and you could see that the people
    who made it were space nuts...
    
    Willie

The appeal of the story is in fact that it's too far fetched.  It could be 
a "real life" soap opera just like the other ones on TV.  The sad fact is we
are very very far away from it.  BTW, the story took place around this 
timeframe, but in a different universe where JFK was not assassinated.

And agony over whether you should have your child to become the first human born
outside of earth is not hokey at all.

Peaceful Jade,
--richard

    Hmm, anyone know when this one will air again?  I missed it!
    
    Jim