Megalextoria
Retro computing and gaming, sci-fi books, tv and movies and other geeky stuff.

Home » Archive » net.sf-lovers » Discovery pods
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Discovery pods [message #112940] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:56 Go to next message
jackh is currently offline  jackh
Messages: 11
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Message-ID: <1738@zehntel.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-Jan-85 19:54:40 EST
Article-I.D.: zehntel.1738
Posted: Thu Jan 10 19:54:40 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jan-85 03:00:35 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: Zehntel Automation Systems Inc, Walnut Creek CA
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.movies:5429 net.sf-lovers:5542


All of you people who claim that in the book 2001 Bowman retrieves
his pod by remote control after his "helmetless" re-entry must have
a different version of the book than I.

According to my copy of 2001, the original version published concurrent
with the movie, Bowman never goes after Poole. After HAL bunted Poole
into oblivion with the pod, Bowman tracks him with the telescope. Seeing
that the air line is torn and that the body doesn't move (except for a
random flapping of an arm a la the dead Captian Ahab in "Moby Dick")
Bowman decides that the rescue of a dead body is not worth the danger
of an EVA.  It is *Poole's* pod that Bowman returns by remote control.

HAL then tries to kill Bowman by opening both the inner and outer pod bay
doors at the same time and evacuating the ship. He has to struggle "uphill"
against this artificial hurricane until he reaches the emergency cubicle
where the spare space suit is.

After disconnecting HAL, Bowman takes one of the pods into the monolith.
So, *according to the book*, the pod bay should have had *two* pods,
both with doors attached, and no air in the ship. Of course, according
to the book, they should have been around Saturn as well!

                             Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Systems
                             ...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh
Re: Discovery pods [message #112941 is a reply to message #112940] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
disc is currently offline  disc
Messages: 61
Registered: March 2013
Karma: 0
Member
Message-ID: <1026@houxz.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 11-Jan-85 08:24:10 EST
Article-I.D.: houxz.1026
Posted: Fri Jan 11 08:24:10 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jan-85 05:39:26 EST
References: <1738@zehntel.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 8
Xref: watmath net.movies:5431 net.sf-lovers:5543


Of course, all this discussion about the differences in the handling
of the pods (and other things in general) between the BOOK 2001, and
the MOVIE 2001 is moot.  Clarke wrote the BOOK 2010 as a sequel
to the MOVIE 2001.

			SJBerry
Re: Discovery pods [message #112942 is a reply to message #112940] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
okie is currently offline  okie
Messages: 69
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Member
Message-ID: <1145@ihuxi.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 11-Jan-85 09:59:49 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxi.1145
Posted: Fri Jan 11 09:59:49 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jan-85 05:48:01 EST
References: <1738@zehntel.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 19
Xref: watmath net.movies:5433 net.sf-lovers:5544

On the matter of the Discovery's pods...

Did anyone else look closely during the sequence
where Brasilov and Curnow first enter the pod bay?
When one of them shines his light into the remaining
pod, you can see through the pod's front window that
the door to the pod is either open or missing --
there's a rectangular opening where the light is
shining through.

Hmmm... Looks like Bowman could have brought back
his pod on remote after pulling his "cannon shot" to
get back into Discovery.  Anybody else out there see
this?  Or was it something in the popcorn?

B.K.Cobb
ihnp4!ihuxi!okie

"You'd better patronize me." 
Re: Discovery pods [message #113021 is a reply to message #112940] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
waltt is currently offline  waltt
Messages: 8
Registered: February 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Message-ID: <5008@tekecs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Jan-85 11:41:27 EST
Article-I.D.: tekecs.5008
Posted: Mon Jan 14 11:41:27 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 04:49:11 EST
References: <1738@zehntel.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 11
Xref: watmath net.movies:5453 net.sf-lovers:5625

> 
> All of you people who claim that in the book 2001 Bowman retrieves
> his pod by remote control after his "helmetless" re-entry must have
> a different version of the book than I.

The pod reference is in the book *2010*, not 2001.  Strange, the book
2010 was a sequel to the movie 2001, not Clarke's book 2001.  Hence,
what is explained in the book 2010 is what happened in the first movie,
not the first book.

                      -- Walt
Re: Re: Discovery pods [message #113038 is a reply to message #112941] Mon, 16 September 2013 13:57 Go to previous message
jackh is currently offline  jackh
Messages: 11
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
Junior Member
Message-ID: <1744@zehntel.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Jan-85 13:23:14 EST
Article-I.D.: zehntel.1744
Posted: Tue Jan 15 13:23:14 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 21:19:08 EST
References: <1738@zehntel.UUCP> <1026@houxz.UUCP>
Organization: Zehntel Automation Systems Inc, Walnut Creek CA
Lines: 31
Xref: watmath net.movies:5459 net.sf-lovers:5643

> 
> Of course, all this discussion about the differences in the handling
> of the pods (and other things in general) between the BOOK 2001, and
> the MOVIE 2001 is moot.  Clarke wrote the BOOK 2010 as a sequel
> to the MOVIE 2001.
> 
> 			SJBerry


This is true, but my question still remains: what do the people mean
who say that, in the book, Bowman retrieved the pod by remote control?
Some mail from Peter Bain prompted me to re-read that part last weekend.
In that sequence, Bowman never goes after Poole. When last seen, the pod,
still under HAL's control and with the lifeless form of Frank Poole still
tethered to it, was accelerating away from the Discovery at full thrust.

BTW, as Peter pointed out, this occured while they were still several
months away from Saturn so there was plenty of time to re-pressurize the
ship. There was also a mention of the smell from the rotting food which
"the air purifiers could never quite get rid of."

-- 




                    Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Systems
                          ...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh
  Switch to threaded view of this topic Create a new topic Submit Reply
Previous Topic: Re: SF-LOVERS Digest V10 #15
Next Topic: James Schmitz (Witches of Karres)
Goto Forum:
  

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Thu Mar 28 11:52:27 EDT 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.17663 seconds