Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 5/3/83; site ukc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!lkt From: lkt@ukc.UUCP (L.K.Turner) Newsgroups: net.movies,net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: another 2010 mistake Message-ID: <4729@ukc.UUCP> Date: Thu, 13-Dec-84 09:09:47 EST Article-I.D.: ukc.4729 Posted: Thu Dec 13 09:09:47 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 15-Dec-84 02:17:26 EST References: <1193@bbncca.ARPA> <1194@bbncca.ARPA> <1115@ut-ngp.UUCP> Reply-To: lkt@ukc.UUCP (L.K.Turner) Followup-To: cmaz504ut-ngp.UUCP (Steve Alexander) Distribution: net Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Kent at Canterbury, UK Lines: 27 Xref: watmath net.movies:5213 net.sf-lovers:5378 Keywords:2010 mistakesmunch...munch...munch...> In article <1115@ut-ngp.UUCP> cmaz504@ut-ngp.UUCP (Steve Alexander) writes: > > ......................... I had always thought that there were only 3 > and if one was lost with Frank Poole, another when Bowman had to enter > the ship manually (ahem) and the last when Bowman heads toward the > monolith then why is that one there? In the book 2010 it explains that after Bowman had finished with HAL , he bought back the pod (The one he lost while entering the ship manually ) under remote control to the pod bay. > .................................... The suit without the helmet in the > docking bay may also be a blooper (shouldn't it be a helmet without a > suit?) but I haven't seen 2001 in awhile. I agree , this does seem to be a mistake. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!lkt ( L.K.Turner)