<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_12_199243</id>
	<title>Emmerich Plans <em>Foundation</em> As a 3D Epic</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265973720000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>spuke4000 writes <i>"Roland Emmerich, the writer/director/producer behind <em>Independence Day</em>, <em>The Day After Tomorrow</em>, and <em>2012</em> is planning to <a href="http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/02/11/exclusive-roland-emmerich-plans-foundation-as-3-d-motion-capture-epic/">adapt Isaac Asimov's <em>Foundation</em> series</a>. The plans include using technology developed for Avatar including 3D and motion capture technology. When asked about using this technology Emmerich responded: 'It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>spuke4000 writes " Roland Emmerich , the writer/director/producer behind Independence Day , The Day After Tomorrow , and 2012 is planning to adapt Isaac Asimov 's Foundation series .
The plans include using technology developed for Avatar including 3D and motion capture technology .
When asked about using this technology Emmerich responded : 'It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>spuke4000 writes "Roland Emmerich, the writer/director/producer behind Independence Day, The Day After Tomorrow, and 2012 is planning to adapt Isaac Asimov's Foundation series.
The plans include using technology developed for Avatar including 3D and motion capture technology.
When asked about using this technology Emmerich responded: 'It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</id>
	<title>Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>McNally</author>
	<datestamp>1265979600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I 'm counting on them to prevent this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124258</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>ozmanjusri</author>
	<datestamp>1265995200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland's target audience is simply.. not you?</i>
<p>
Not so much purposefully, more with a sense of outrage that something I value will be parodied in the worst possible way.
</p><p>
Though Emmerich, COULD make the movie of some benefit to people like me. All he needs to do is hook a generator to the longitudinal axis of old Isaac's coffin and let us run our reading lights from it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland 's target audience is simply.. not you ?
Not so much purposefully , more with a sense of outrage that something I value will be parodied in the worst possible way .
Though Emmerich , COULD make the movie of some benefit to people like me .
All he needs to do is hook a generator to the longitudinal axis of old Isaac 's coffin and let us run our reading lights from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland's target audience is simply.. not you?
Not so much purposefully, more with a sense of outrage that something I value will be parodied in the worst possible way.
Though Emmerich, COULD make the movie of some benefit to people like me.
All he needs to do is hook a generator to the longitudinal axis of old Isaac's coffin and let us run our reading lights from it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123010</id>
	<title>Anticipating the script</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265984460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looking forward to more of Emmerich's excellent one-liners:</p><p><i> <b>Hari Seldon:</b>  I'm Hari Seldon, bitch, and I put the "psycho" in psychohistory!</i></p><p>Oops, just threw up in my mouth.  I can't continue, the rest of you will have to take it from here...</p><p>- T</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looking forward to more of Emmerich 's excellent one-liners : Hari Seldon : I 'm Hari Seldon , bitch , and I put the " psycho " in psychohistory ! Oops , just threw up in my mouth .
I ca n't continue , the rest of you will have to take it from here...- T</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looking forward to more of Emmerich's excellent one-liners: Hari Seldon:  I'm Hari Seldon, bitch, and I put the "psycho" in psychohistory!Oops, just threw up in my mouth.
I can't continue, the rest of you will have to take it from here...- T</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31132166</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>bidule</author>
	<datestamp>1266079020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Foundation is mostly people have discussions. What kind of movie can you make out of that?</p></div><p>French movie.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Foundation is mostly people have discussions .
What kind of movie can you make out of that ? French movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Foundation is mostly people have discussions.
What kind of movie can you make out of that?French movie.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124574</id>
	<title>For real?</title>
	<author>SEWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1265998860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He doesn't know how to shoot it for real?  Just have one of the assistants apply for a filming permit on Trantor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He does n't know how to shoot it for real ?
Just have one of the assistants apply for a filming permit on Trantor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He doesn't know how to shoot it for real?
Just have one of the assistants apply for a filming permit on Trantor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31189508</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, you forgot the best part!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266526680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Funny, when I read 'Foundation' (book 1, not series), I wondered how they built an entire society with just two women. I guess there won't be a lot of actress auditions for this one...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , when I read 'Foundation ' ( book 1 , not series ) , I wondered how they built an entire society with just two women .
I guess there wo n't be a lot of actress auditions for this one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, when I read 'Foundation' (book 1, not series), I wondered how they built an entire society with just two women.
I guess there won't be a lot of actress auditions for this one...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122400</id>
	<title>I've been waiting...</title>
	<author>Pedrito</author>
	<datestamp>1265981160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was wondering how long it would take someone to come along and desecrate Foundation. Foundation was my introduction to real Sci-Fi literature. It's always held a special place in my heart. The obvious problem with Foundation as a movie is, it'd be epically boring if it's even remotely true to the book. It's just not something you can properly do as a movie.<br> <br>

But, if I'm able to completely separate the movie, in my mind, from the book, then I might actually enjoy it. As corny and ridiculous as Independence Day was, I kind of enjoyed it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was wondering how long it would take someone to come along and desecrate Foundation .
Foundation was my introduction to real Sci-Fi literature .
It 's always held a special place in my heart .
The obvious problem with Foundation as a movie is , it 'd be epically boring if it 's even remotely true to the book .
It 's just not something you can properly do as a movie .
But , if I 'm able to completely separate the movie , in my mind , from the book , then I might actually enjoy it .
As corny and ridiculous as Independence Day was , I kind of enjoyed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was wondering how long it would take someone to come along and desecrate Foundation.
Foundation was my introduction to real Sci-Fi literature.
It's always held a special place in my heart.
The obvious problem with Foundation as a movie is, it'd be epically boring if it's even remotely true to the book.
It's just not something you can properly do as a movie.
But, if I'm able to completely separate the movie, in my mind, from the book, then I might actually enjoy it.
As corny and ridiculous as Independence Day was, I kind of enjoyed it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125570</id>
	<title>Why motion capture?</title>
	<author>Michael\_gr</author>
	<datestamp>1266058620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are no aliens in "Foundation". None at all. Just humans. Emerich got a case of the me-too's, that's all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are no aliens in " Foundation " .
None at all .
Just humans .
Emerich got a case of the me-too 's , that 's all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are no aliens in "Foundation".
None at all.
Just humans.
Emerich got a case of the me-too's, that's all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122504</id>
	<title>Ridley Scott, save us!</title>
	<author>euxneks</author>
	<datestamp>1265981640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would love to see what Ridley Scott would do with the Foundation Universe...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would love to see what Ridley Scott would do with the Foundation Universe.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would love to see what Ridley Scott would do with the Foundation Universe...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123558</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1265988540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.</i></p><p>Perhaps in 10,000 years a re-screening of the movie shown to the populace forments a revolt that takes out the government of the day, all run by descendants of modern-day Hollywood...</p><p>We suffer a little now to protect the mysterious FUTURE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I 'm counting on them to prevent this.Perhaps in 10,000 years a re-screening of the movie shown to the populace forments a revolt that takes out the government of the day , all run by descendants of modern-day Hollywood...We suffer a little now to protect the mysterious FUTURE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.Perhaps in 10,000 years a re-screening of the movie shown to the populace forments a revolt that takes out the government of the day, all run by descendants of modern-day Hollywood...We suffer a little now to protect the mysterious FUTURE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>The Living Fractal</author>
	<datestamp>1265978400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland's target audience is simply.. not you? (You know.. the intelligent type.)

Most people really enjoyed ID4.  Most people will probably enjoy Foundation in 3D, but only because Roland will dumb it down to their levels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland 's target audience is simply.. not you ?
( You know.. the intelligent type .
) Most people really enjoyed ID4 .
Most people will probably enjoy Foundation in 3D , but only because Roland will dumb it down to their levels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you are purposefully disregarding the fact that Roland's target audience is simply.. not you?
(You know.. the intelligent type.
)

Most people really enjoyed ID4.
Most people will probably enjoy Foundation in 3D, but only because Roland will dumb it down to their levels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31126916</id>
	<title>Dear filmmaking types:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266076200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Enough with the goddamned 3D!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Enough with the goddamned 3D !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enough with the goddamned 3D!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122052</id>
	<title>Hollywood</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265979660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Things like this don't normally piss me off, but this seriously has. Foundation is quite famous for not being translatable for film, and I doubt even a competent director and head screenwriter will pull it off well, but to get a hack cunt like this? No.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Things like this do n't normally piss me off , but this seriously has .
Foundation is quite famous for not being translatable for film , and I doubt even a competent director and head screenwriter will pull it off well , but to get a hack cunt like this ?
No .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Things like this don't normally piss me off, but this seriously has.
Foundation is quite famous for not being translatable for film, and I doubt even a competent director and head screenwriter will pull it off well, but to get a hack cunt like this?
No.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31130930</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Lars T.</author>
	<datestamp>1266064500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As far as mindless big budget entertainment goes, I'll take Emmerich over Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer (esp. when paired). Just immagine any movie by Emmerich remade by those guys.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As far as mindless big budget entertainment goes , I 'll take Emmerich over Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer ( esp .
when paired ) .
Just immagine any movie by Emmerich remade by those guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As far as mindless big budget entertainment goes, I'll take Emmerich over Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer (esp.
when paired).
Just immagine any movie by Emmerich remade by those guys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123364</id>
	<title>Someone missed the point of the Foundation series</title>
	<author>Torodung</author>
	<datestamp>1265986800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry. I don't buy it. Trying to do the "Foundation Trilogy" as a movie is like trying to do "The Miracle Worker" as a radio program.</p><p>--<br>Toro</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry .
I do n't buy it .
Trying to do the " Foundation Trilogy " as a movie is like trying to do " The Miracle Worker " as a radio program.--Toro</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry.
I don't buy it.
Trying to do the "Foundation Trilogy" as a movie is like trying to do "The Miracle Worker" as a radio program.--Toro</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31127450</id>
	<title>How about Uwe Boll?</title>
	<author>haggus71</author>
	<datestamp>1266080520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Roland Emmerich?  If they want to fuck a great written work of art that bad, why don't they just get Uwe Boll to do it, and lambaste it with style?  They are both on the same artistic level, after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Roland Emmerich ?
If they want to fuck a great written work of art that bad , why do n't they just get Uwe Boll to do it , and lambaste it with style ?
They are both on the same artistic level , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roland Emmerich?
If they want to fuck a great written work of art that bad, why don't they just get Uwe Boll to do it, and lambaste it with style?
They are both on the same artistic level, after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123562</id>
	<title>More MULE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265988600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The foundation series was very interesting, but be honest -- the last books in the series were less awesome than the first group. But most importantly, I just want to see the Mule's story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The foundation series was very interesting , but be honest -- the last books in the series were less awesome than the first group .
But most importantly , I just want to see the Mule 's story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The foundation series was very interesting, but be honest -- the last books in the series were less awesome than the first group.
But most importantly, I just want to see the Mule's story.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123378</id>
	<title>Please don't **** it up, like Starship Troopers</title>
	<author>FreeFlyer</author>
	<datestamp>1265986920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The transformation of the BOOK Starship Troopers was to the MOVIE is what happens to a cow after its journey through fast food chain and the subsequent digestive system.  Indeed, once you throw anatomical waste at people, very few will wipe it off and perform forensics to discover the real animal it originated from. </p><p>

It took me 7 years and endless recommendations to shake the Starship Troopers movie and finally read the book.

</p><p>
Will the movies forever taint the Foundation series and prevent generations of young readers from knowing the brilliance of the Seldon plan? I can make educated guesses, and I sincerely hope they turn out wrong.
</p><p>
A sign in a library comes to mind: "Don't judge a book by its movie."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The transformation of the BOOK Starship Troopers was to the MOVIE is what happens to a cow after its journey through fast food chain and the subsequent digestive system .
Indeed , once you throw anatomical waste at people , very few will wipe it off and perform forensics to discover the real animal it originated from .
It took me 7 years and endless recommendations to shake the Starship Troopers movie and finally read the book .
Will the movies forever taint the Foundation series and prevent generations of young readers from knowing the brilliance of the Seldon plan ?
I can make educated guesses , and I sincerely hope they turn out wrong .
A sign in a library comes to mind : " Do n't judge a book by its movie .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The transformation of the BOOK Starship Troopers was to the MOVIE is what happens to a cow after its journey through fast food chain and the subsequent digestive system.
Indeed, once you throw anatomical waste at people, very few will wipe it off and perform forensics to discover the real animal it originated from.
It took me 7 years and endless recommendations to shake the Starship Troopers movie and finally read the book.
Will the movies forever taint the Foundation series and prevent generations of young readers from knowing the brilliance of the Seldon plan?
I can make educated guesses, and I sincerely hope they turn out wrong.
A sign in a library comes to mind: "Don't judge a book by its movie.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123708</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>Spy der Mann</author>
	<datestamp>1265989920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.</p></div><p>You mean you still don't know yet?</p><p>Slashdot <b>is</b> Terminus. So far our Encyclopaedia Technologica has been doing pretty well... just as planned.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I 'm counting on them to prevent this.You mean you still do n't know yet ? Slashdot is Terminus .
So far our Encyclopaedia Technologica has been doing pretty well... just as planned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there really is a secret force out there influencing events to preserve civilization I'm counting on them to prevent this.You mean you still don't know yet?Slashdot is Terminus.
So far our Encyclopaedia Technologica has been doing pretty well... just as planned.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124868</id>
	<title>Re:Please don't **** it up, like Starship Troopers</title>
	<author>AfroTrance</author>
	<datestamp>1266002340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think Starship Troopers is a good b-grade action sci-fi, despite it not following the book at all. It's in the same league as Total Recall, in terms of quality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Starship Troopers is a good b-grade action sci-fi , despite it not following the book at all .
It 's in the same league as Total Recall , in terms of quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Starship Troopers is a good b-grade action sci-fi, despite it not following the book at all.
It's in the same league as Total Recall, in terms of quality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124230</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>Eclipse-now</author>
	<datestamp>1265994960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This comment was marked 'insightful'? Why has my sense of humour been activated by an 'insightful' comment... oh no... what's happening to my brain?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This comment was marked 'insightful ' ?
Why has my sense of humour been activated by an 'insightful ' comment... oh no... what 's happening to my brain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This comment was marked 'insightful'?
Why has my sense of humour been activated by an 'insightful' comment... oh no... what's happening to my brain?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122134</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1265980020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>How would you propose one could possibly experience the awesome exhibition of the unique ability of The Mule <i>without</i> 3D?! Luddite!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>How would you propose one could possibly experience the awesome exhibition of the unique ability of The Mule without 3D ? !
Luddite ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would you propose one could possibly experience the awesome exhibition of the unique ability of The Mule without 3D?!
Luddite!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31126546</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>nahdude812</author>
	<datestamp>1266072780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Godzilla was fun, too (though obviously it had big problems).</p></div></blockquote><p>Isn't that the <em>point</em> of a Godzilla movie?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Godzilla was fun , too ( though obviously it had big problems ) .Is n't that the point of a Godzilla movie ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Godzilla was fun, too (though obviously it had big problems).Isn't that the point of a Godzilla movie?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122084</id>
	<title>We're not going to like this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265979780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The foundation books, while great Sci-fi, don't have a lot of action.</p><p>I'm beting that Emmerich will "sex up" asimov's grand story with some ridiculous chase scenes and lots of action.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The foundation books , while great Sci-fi , do n't have a lot of action.I 'm beting that Emmerich will " sex up " asimov 's grand story with some ridiculous chase scenes and lots of action .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The foundation books, while great Sci-fi, don't have a lot of action.I'm beting that Emmerich will "sex up" asimov's grand story with some ridiculous chase scenes and lots of action.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125784</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>elmartinos</author>
	<datestamp>1266062160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am most definitely sure Roland Emmerich is the Mule. Not even Seldon could have foreseen this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am most definitely sure Roland Emmerich is the Mule .
Not even Seldon could have foreseen this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am most definitely sure Roland Emmerich is the Mule.
Not even Seldon could have foreseen this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124600</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's actually best suited to a miniseries, if anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's actually best suited to a miniseries , if anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's actually best suited to a miniseries, if anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31127332</id>
	<title>And what about the money?</title>
	<author>Garwulf</author>
	<datestamp>1266079920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surely I can't be the only one who got REALLY worried when I read this part of the interview: "It's not only the effect of 3-D, ['Avatar' has] just shown that if you do a movie in 3-D, you can ask for more money and that's the trick."</p><p>It really seems to me that this is proof that Emmerich has missed the point here.  3D is a wonderful tool for telling stories, but the story has to be there first.  I've been a fan of movies all my life, and many of the most impressive movies I've seen were done on a very low budget - what made them impressive was that they told really good stories, or they told their story really well.</p><p>To take an example of the first: Moon.  If you haven't seen it, see it.  It's an amazing movie, a mind-blowing story, and it was done with a budget of all of $5 million.  Another example: Cube.  That's a very effective and extremely imaginative SF horror movie, with a budget of a grand total of around $365,000.</p><p>But, what about a larger story?  One with lots of pyrotechnics, battles, etc.  Well, besides the fact that each Lord of the Rings movie came in at $90 million only - making them now cheaper than most other event movies - I present for your consideration Underworld.  It doesn't have a mind-blowing story - it's a pretty basic one, although it is well-told - but it does have a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves, and it was incredibly stylish with very good effects, and an emphasis on story.  Its budget?  Around $22 million.</p><p>Emmerich's comment about how 3D will be very good at shaking loose more money worries me a great deal.  I'm afraid that we're going to see lots of big event movies that are all computer FX, and lacking in craft or storytelling.  Sure, you'll see the money on the screen, but part of creativity in moviemaking is coming up with new ways to tell stories, and limited budgets are often a good thing - they force the filmmaker to concentrate on the important parts of the movie, rather than getting distracted by the FX sequences.  Now we're looking at 3D for the sake of 3D - or even worse, for the sake of getting money to do 3D - rather than 3D because that's the best way to tell the story.</p><p>(Aside from which, am I the only one who thinks that a few too many people are talking about FX allowing them to do things they couldn't do before, particularly when their examples ARE things that have been done before, and done well?  Sure, there are stories that are probably unfilmable, such as Dante's Divine Comedy, but that's mainly because it's more travelogue than story - all the visual effects could have been done for that by Ray Harryhausen forty years ago.  Seriously, if King Kong could do it in 1933, it wasn't impossible before computers.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surely I ca n't be the only one who got REALLY worried when I read this part of the interview : " It 's not only the effect of 3-D , [ 'Avatar ' has ] just shown that if you do a movie in 3-D , you can ask for more money and that 's the trick .
" It really seems to me that this is proof that Emmerich has missed the point here .
3D is a wonderful tool for telling stories , but the story has to be there first .
I 've been a fan of movies all my life , and many of the most impressive movies I 've seen were done on a very low budget - what made them impressive was that they told really good stories , or they told their story really well.To take an example of the first : Moon .
If you have n't seen it , see it .
It 's an amazing movie , a mind-blowing story , and it was done with a budget of all of $ 5 million .
Another example : Cube .
That 's a very effective and extremely imaginative SF horror movie , with a budget of a grand total of around $ 365,000.But , what about a larger story ?
One with lots of pyrotechnics , battles , etc .
Well , besides the fact that each Lord of the Rings movie came in at $ 90 million only - making them now cheaper than most other event movies - I present for your consideration Underworld .
It does n't have a mind-blowing story - it 's a pretty basic one , although it is well-told - but it does have a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves , and it was incredibly stylish with very good effects , and an emphasis on story .
Its budget ?
Around $ 22 million.Emmerich 's comment about how 3D will be very good at shaking loose more money worries me a great deal .
I 'm afraid that we 're going to see lots of big event movies that are all computer FX , and lacking in craft or storytelling .
Sure , you 'll see the money on the screen , but part of creativity in moviemaking is coming up with new ways to tell stories , and limited budgets are often a good thing - they force the filmmaker to concentrate on the important parts of the movie , rather than getting distracted by the FX sequences .
Now we 're looking at 3D for the sake of 3D - or even worse , for the sake of getting money to do 3D - rather than 3D because that 's the best way to tell the story .
( Aside from which , am I the only one who thinks that a few too many people are talking about FX allowing them to do things they could n't do before , particularly when their examples ARE things that have been done before , and done well ?
Sure , there are stories that are probably unfilmable , such as Dante 's Divine Comedy , but that 's mainly because it 's more travelogue than story - all the visual effects could have been done for that by Ray Harryhausen forty years ago .
Seriously , if King Kong could do it in 1933 , it was n't impossible before computers .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surely I can't be the only one who got REALLY worried when I read this part of the interview: "It's not only the effect of 3-D, ['Avatar' has] just shown that if you do a movie in 3-D, you can ask for more money and that's the trick.
"It really seems to me that this is proof that Emmerich has missed the point here.
3D is a wonderful tool for telling stories, but the story has to be there first.
I've been a fan of movies all my life, and many of the most impressive movies I've seen were done on a very low budget - what made them impressive was that they told really good stories, or they told their story really well.To take an example of the first: Moon.
If you haven't seen it, see it.
It's an amazing movie, a mind-blowing story, and it was done with a budget of all of $5 million.
Another example: Cube.
That's a very effective and extremely imaginative SF horror movie, with a budget of a grand total of around $365,000.But, what about a larger story?
One with lots of pyrotechnics, battles, etc.
Well, besides the fact that each Lord of the Rings movie came in at $90 million only - making them now cheaper than most other event movies - I present for your consideration Underworld.
It doesn't have a mind-blowing story - it's a pretty basic one, although it is well-told - but it does have a centuries-old war between vampires and werewolves, and it was incredibly stylish with very good effects, and an emphasis on story.
Its budget?
Around $22 million.Emmerich's comment about how 3D will be very good at shaking loose more money worries me a great deal.
I'm afraid that we're going to see lots of big event movies that are all computer FX, and lacking in craft or storytelling.
Sure, you'll see the money on the screen, but part of creativity in moviemaking is coming up with new ways to tell stories, and limited budgets are often a good thing - they force the filmmaker to concentrate on the important parts of the movie, rather than getting distracted by the FX sequences.
Now we're looking at 3D for the sake of 3D - or even worse, for the sake of getting money to do 3D - rather than 3D because that's the best way to tell the story.
(Aside from which, am I the only one who thinks that a few too many people are talking about FX allowing them to do things they couldn't do before, particularly when their examples ARE things that have been done before, and done well?
Sure, there are stories that are probably unfilmable, such as Dante's Divine Comedy, but that's mainly because it's more travelogue than story - all the visual effects could have been done for that by Ray Harryhausen forty years ago.
Seriously, if King Kong could do it in 1933, it wasn't impossible before computers.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</id>
	<title>Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265977320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The same Roland Emmerich that wrote the script for <i>Independence Day</i>?  The movie where Will Smith flies a spaceship out of an alien base and yells "Oh! Elvis has left the building!" ?  Where Will Smith pauses after beating up an alien and says "Welcome to Earth!" ?  Where Randy Quaid says, "Payback's a bitch, ain't it?" ?  Where Randy Quaid is about to fly his ship up into an Alien fortress to blow it up and says "All right, you alien assholes! In the words of my generation: Up Yours!" followed by "Ha-ha-ha! Hello, boys! I'm back! " ?  Where Jeff Goldblum says, "Must go faster!" ?  <br> <br>

<b>That's</b> the writing we have to look forward to?  And the guy who wrote that is directing?  <br> <br>

<i>*curls up into fetal position*</i> <br> <br>

Well, after seeing <i>I, Robot</i> I must say that at least they waited until Asimov was dead before hacking his works up into utter drivel in order to milk those cash cows.  Gee, maybe if we're lucky we'll get to see the psychohistorian Hari Seldon played by Tom Cruise scream, "And that's my thousand year plan, bitch!" while snapping his fingers back and forth?  <br> <br>

So what are we looking at here?  A movie full of catch phrases shot in a new technology that just broke records for box office revenues?  Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I'd rather take a bullet to the head than see.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same Roland Emmerich that wrote the script for Independence Day ?
The movie where Will Smith flies a spaceship out of an alien base and yells " Oh !
Elvis has left the building !
" ?
Where Will Smith pauses after beating up an alien and says " Welcome to Earth !
" ?
Where Randy Quaid says , " Payback 's a bitch , ai n't it ?
" ?
Where Randy Quaid is about to fly his ship up into an Alien fortress to blow it up and says " All right , you alien assholes !
In the words of my generation : Up Yours !
" followed by " Ha-ha-ha !
Hello , boys !
I 'm back !
" ?
Where Jeff Goldblum says , " Must go faster !
" ?
That 's the writing we have to look forward to ?
And the guy who wrote that is directing ?
* curls up into fetal position * Well , after seeing I , Robot I must say that at least they waited until Asimov was dead before hacking his works up into utter drivel in order to milk those cash cows .
Gee , maybe if we 're lucky we 'll get to see the psychohistorian Hari Seldon played by Tom Cruise scream , " And that 's my thousand year plan , bitch !
" while snapping his fingers back and forth ?
So what are we looking at here ?
A movie full of catch phrases shot in a new technology that just broke records for box office revenues ?
Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I 'd rather take a bullet to the head than see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same Roland Emmerich that wrote the script for Independence Day?
The movie where Will Smith flies a spaceship out of an alien base and yells "Oh!
Elvis has left the building!
" ?
Where Will Smith pauses after beating up an alien and says "Welcome to Earth!
" ?
Where Randy Quaid says, "Payback's a bitch, ain't it?
" ?
Where Randy Quaid is about to fly his ship up into an Alien fortress to blow it up and says "All right, you alien assholes!
In the words of my generation: Up Yours!
" followed by "Ha-ha-ha!
Hello, boys!
I'm back!
" ?
Where Jeff Goldblum says, "Must go faster!
" ?
That's the writing we have to look forward to?
And the guy who wrote that is directing?
*curls up into fetal position*  

Well, after seeing I, Robot I must say that at least they waited until Asimov was dead before hacking his works up into utter drivel in order to milk those cash cows.
Gee, maybe if we're lucky we'll get to see the psychohistorian Hari Seldon played by Tom Cruise scream, "And that's my thousand year plan, bitch!
" while snapping his fingers back and forth?
So what are we looking at here?
A movie full of catch phrases shot in a new technology that just broke records for box office revenues?
Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I'd rather take a bullet to the head than see.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124594</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265999040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Foundation is mostly people have discussions. What kind of movie can you make out of that?</p></div><p>Every Kevin Smith movie ever made?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Foundation is mostly people have discussions .
What kind of movie can you make out of that ? Every Kevin Smith movie ever made ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Foundation is mostly people have discussions.
What kind of movie can you make out of that?Every Kevin Smith movie ever made?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122964</id>
	<title>A Voyage to Arcturus</title>
	<author>kencf0618</author>
	<datestamp>1265984160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suffice to say, I await a mechinima of David Lindsay's gnostic novel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suffice to say , I await a mechinima of David Lindsay 's gnostic novel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suffice to say, I await a mechinima of David Lindsay's gnostic novel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123584</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265988840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you seen a movie called The Man from Earth?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen a movie called The Man from Earth ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen a movie called The Man from Earth?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31127194</id>
	<title>3D</title>
	<author>Phoghat</author>
	<datestamp>1266078900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because History and Psychology come across as so much better when shot in 3D</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because History and Psychology come across as so much better when shot in 3D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because History and Psychology come across as so much better when shot in 3D</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124560</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265998680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reservoir Dogs is mostly a dialogue based film, there really isn't much that much action, and yet it has broad appeal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reservoir Dogs is mostly a dialogue based film , there really is n't much that much action , and yet it has broad appeal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reservoir Dogs is mostly a dialogue based film, there really isn't much that much action, and yet it has broad appeal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31129068</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, you forgot the best part!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266092700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't need CG.</p><p>The classic Battlestar Galactica was big budget without CG.  The original sounds for laser blasts were a tweaked bullwhip cracking in the air sound.  They used scale models and did it well.  While the scripts weren't anything to write home about, the effects were simply breathtaking in some cases.  Same thing with Buck Rogers.  A lot of their cityscapes looked cool and futuristic.</p><p>Maybe they should get in contact with John Dykstra (one of the special effects wizards behind BR, BSG, and the original Star Wars trilogy) and see what he can do for 'em.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't need CG.The classic Battlestar Galactica was big budget without CG .
The original sounds for laser blasts were a tweaked bullwhip cracking in the air sound .
They used scale models and did it well .
While the scripts were n't anything to write home about , the effects were simply breathtaking in some cases .
Same thing with Buck Rogers .
A lot of their cityscapes looked cool and futuristic.Maybe they should get in contact with John Dykstra ( one of the special effects wizards behind BR , BSG , and the original Star Wars trilogy ) and see what he can do for 'em .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't need CG.The classic Battlestar Galactica was big budget without CG.
The original sounds for laser blasts were a tweaked bullwhip cracking in the air sound.
They used scale models and did it well.
While the scripts weren't anything to write home about, the effects were simply breathtaking in some cases.
Same thing with Buck Rogers.
A lot of their cityscapes looked cool and futuristic.Maybe they should get in contact with John Dykstra (one of the special effects wizards behind BR, BSG, and the original Star Wars trilogy) and see what he can do for 'em.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123156</id>
	<title>As long as they're raping Asimov's corpse...</title>
	<author>Legion303</author>
	<datestamp>1265985420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Was Uwe Boll not available?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Was Uwe Boll not available ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was Uwe Boll not available?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125648</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266059760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you be hating on Stargate!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you be hating on Stargate !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you be hating on Stargate!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123730</id>
	<title>omg, awesome! finally!... wait, what?!?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265990100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it hard to believe how rapidly I plummeted from ecstatic to horrified.  Did someone change his calendar to April 1st?  I cannot comprehend a more backwards and misguided approach to foundation.  Did he actually read any of it?</p><p>Sure, there's plenty of room for epic scale particularly in portraying Trantor.  Corellia from episode III comes to mind but scaled way up.  CGI sure, but mocap?  "All" CGI?</p><p>Also I don't see how the vaguest shell of the original concept could survive attempts for climactic battles.  The whole idea was that all of the battles were anticlimactic.  That was the whole point: nothing was left to chance.  It's like watching dominos falling.  The beauty is in the revelation of the plans to the reader.  In that respect it reminds me more of Ocean's Eleven or V for Vendetta than Avatar.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it hard to believe how rapidly I plummeted from ecstatic to horrified .
Did someone change his calendar to April 1st ?
I can not comprehend a more backwards and misguided approach to foundation .
Did he actually read any of it ? Sure , there 's plenty of room for epic scale particularly in portraying Trantor .
Corellia from episode III comes to mind but scaled way up .
CGI sure , but mocap ?
" All " CGI ? Also I do n't see how the vaguest shell of the original concept could survive attempts for climactic battles .
The whole idea was that all of the battles were anticlimactic .
That was the whole point : nothing was left to chance .
It 's like watching dominos falling .
The beauty is in the revelation of the plans to the reader .
In that respect it reminds me more of Ocean 's Eleven or V for Vendetta than Avatar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it hard to believe how rapidly I plummeted from ecstatic to horrified.
Did someone change his calendar to April 1st?
I cannot comprehend a more backwards and misguided approach to foundation.
Did he actually read any of it?Sure, there's plenty of room for epic scale particularly in portraying Trantor.
Corellia from episode III comes to mind but scaled way up.
CGI sure, but mocap?
"All" CGI?Also I don't see how the vaguest shell of the original concept could survive attempts for climactic battles.
The whole idea was that all of the battles were anticlimactic.
That was the whole point: nothing was left to chance.
It's like watching dominos falling.
The beauty is in the revelation of the plans to the reader.
In that respect it reminds me more of Ocean's Eleven or V for Vendetta than Avatar.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122972</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>DreamingReal</author>
	<datestamp>1265984160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget, Hari Seldon's solution included the reduction of 10,000 years of barbarism to 1,000.  I started counting at 2000.  Only 990 years to go!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget , Hari Seldon 's solution included the reduction of 10,000 years of barbarism to 1,000 .
I started counting at 2000 .
Only 990 years to go !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget, Hari Seldon's solution included the reduction of 10,000 years of barbarism to 1,000.
I started counting at 2000.
Only 990 years to go!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123924</id>
	<title>Sky Captain Style</title>
	<author>AP31R0N</author>
	<datestamp>1265991900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'd do this Sky Captain style.  Real actors, CG environment, 50's looking gadgets.  i'd do it as a TV series so you could give it the time it needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'd do this Sky Captain style .
Real actors , CG environment , 50 's looking gadgets .
i 'd do it as a TV series so you could give it the time it needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'd do this Sky Captain style.
Real actors, CG environment, 50's looking gadgets.
i'd do it as a TV series so you could give it the time it needs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123802</id>
	<title>I can just imagine it</title>
	<author>AfroTrance</author>
	<datestamp>1265990760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The entire story takes place over a few years. The Mule is played by a devious British actor. The protagonist, probably a middle aged guy with a dysfunctional family or a young guy after a girl, builds Terminus, defeats The Empire, defeats The Mule. The Second Foundation is a shadowy organisation who at the start appears like an enemy but helps the protagonist over the course of the movie. There will be at least three massive space battles. Hari will be played by Morgan Freeman. The scale will be reduced, as Galaxies are too big for the average person to comprehend. There will be aliens and robots, perhaps alien robots.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The entire story takes place over a few years .
The Mule is played by a devious British actor .
The protagonist , probably a middle aged guy with a dysfunctional family or a young guy after a girl , builds Terminus , defeats The Empire , defeats The Mule .
The Second Foundation is a shadowy organisation who at the start appears like an enemy but helps the protagonist over the course of the movie .
There will be at least three massive space battles .
Hari will be played by Morgan Freeman .
The scale will be reduced , as Galaxies are too big for the average person to comprehend .
There will be aliens and robots , perhaps alien robots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entire story takes place over a few years.
The Mule is played by a devious British actor.
The protagonist, probably a middle aged guy with a dysfunctional family or a young guy after a girl, builds Terminus, defeats The Empire, defeats The Mule.
The Second Foundation is a shadowy organisation who at the start appears like an enemy but helps the protagonist over the course of the movie.
There will be at least three massive space battles.
Hari will be played by Morgan Freeman.
The scale will be reduced, as Galaxies are too big for the average person to comprehend.
There will be aliens and robots, perhaps alien robots.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122374</id>
	<title>Emmerich? NOOOOOO!</title>
	<author>Oyjord</author>
	<datestamp>1265980980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Emmerich is one of the worst directors in contemporary cinema.  Please, the PTB need to keep him as far away from Foundation as humanly possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Emmerich is one of the worst directors in contemporary cinema .
Please , the PTB need to keep him as far away from Foundation as humanly possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Emmerich is one of the worst directors in contemporary cinema.
Please, the PTB need to keep him as far away from Foundation as humanly possible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122948</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265984100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Let's not be hasty here. Emmerich has done a lot of movies, some of them have to be good.<br>*takes a quick stroll over to IMDB*<br>Well, shit. Guess we're boned, eh?</i></p><p>Um...Stargate? Moon 44?</p><p>I thought Independence Day was stupid, yeah, but it was \_fun\_, as was Day After Tomorrow and his version of Godzilla was fun, too (though obviously it had big problems).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not be hasty here .
Emmerich has done a lot of movies , some of them have to be good .
* takes a quick stroll over to IMDB * Well , shit .
Guess we 're boned , eh ? Um...Stargate ?
Moon 44 ? I thought Independence Day was stupid , yeah , but it was \ _fun \ _ , as was Day After Tomorrow and his version of Godzilla was fun , too ( though obviously it had big problems ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not be hasty here.
Emmerich has done a lot of movies, some of them have to be good.
*takes a quick stroll over to IMDB*Well, shit.
Guess we're boned, eh?Um...Stargate?
Moon 44?I thought Independence Day was stupid, yeah, but it was \_fun\_, as was Day After Tomorrow and his version of Godzilla was fun, too (though obviously it had big problems).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123374</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>RobinEggs</author>
	<datestamp>1265986860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Years later, when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work</p></div><p>
This notion set off a <i>massive</i> warning bell in my head. Nothing could be worse than something once finished which gets re-written into something 8 times longer, or something written specifically for length in the first place. Exhibit one: Moby Dick. Exhibit two: much of Charles Dickens. If this is true you've probably convinced me to <i>never</i> read Foundation, or at least to track down the original short stories rather than trudge through a novelization of a short yet clearly complete, cerebral, and influential story.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Years later , when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work This notion set off a massive warning bell in my head .
Nothing could be worse than something once finished which gets re-written into something 8 times longer , or something written specifically for length in the first place .
Exhibit one : Moby Dick .
Exhibit two : much of Charles Dickens .
If this is true you 've probably convinced me to never read Foundation , or at least to track down the original short stories rather than trudge through a novelization of a short yet clearly complete , cerebral , and influential story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Years later, when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work
This notion set off a massive warning bell in my head.
Nothing could be worse than something once finished which gets re-written into something 8 times longer, or something written specifically for length in the first place.
Exhibit one: Moby Dick.
Exhibit two: much of Charles Dickens.
If this is true you've probably convinced me to never read Foundation, or at least to track down the original short stories rather than trudge through a novelization of a short yet clearly complete, cerebral, and influential story.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</id>
	<title>Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265980140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These are absolutely some of my very favorite books. But as I recall, Asimov's own foreword to the original trilogy makes the idea of a movie series seem pretty stupid. He started Foundation as a series of short stories. Years later, when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work, Asimov had to go back and re-read the material. He reports that, as he sat there reading, he kept waiting for something to happen in the story. He was right (of course): Foundation is mostly people have discussions. What kind of movie can you make out of that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These are absolutely some of my very favorite books .
But as I recall , Asimov 's own foreword to the original trilogy makes the idea of a movie series seem pretty stupid .
He started Foundation as a series of short stories .
Years later , when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work , Asimov had to go back and re-read the material .
He reports that , as he sat there reading , he kept waiting for something to happen in the story .
He was right ( of course ) : Foundation is mostly people have discussions .
What kind of movie can you make out of that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These are absolutely some of my very favorite books.
But as I recall, Asimov's own foreword to the original trilogy makes the idea of a movie series seem pretty stupid.
He started Foundation as a series of short stories.
Years later, when a publisher was trying to persuade him to make a longer Foundation work, Asimov had to go back and re-read the material.
He reports that, as he sat there reading, he kept waiting for something to happen in the story.
He was right (of course): Foundation is mostly people have discussions.
What kind of movie can you make out of that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646</id>
	<title>Hey, you forgot the best part!</title>
	<author>spun</author>
	<datestamp>1265977800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hacking into an alien military computer system with an Apple laptop! How could you leave THAT out?</p><p>Funny, when I read the Foundation series, I never pictured it as a big budget action movie. I never thought it would need 3Dand whiz bang special effects. And, you know, it isn't one story, it's a whole bunch of separate stories. I'm thinking this movie will bear about as much resemblance to the books as <i>I, Robot</i> did to its books. That is to say, I predict they will share a similar title, and not much else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hacking into an alien military computer system with an Apple laptop !
How could you leave THAT out ? Funny , when I read the Foundation series , I never pictured it as a big budget action movie .
I never thought it would need 3Dand whiz bang special effects .
And , you know , it is n't one story , it 's a whole bunch of separate stories .
I 'm thinking this movie will bear about as much resemblance to the books as I , Robot did to its books .
That is to say , I predict they will share a similar title , and not much else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hacking into an alien military computer system with an Apple laptop!
How could you leave THAT out?Funny, when I read the Foundation series, I never pictured it as a big budget action movie.
I never thought it would need 3Dand whiz bang special effects.
And, you know, it isn't one story, it's a whole bunch of separate stories.
I'm thinking this movie will bear about as much resemblance to the books as I, Robot did to its books.
That is to say, I predict they will share a similar title, and not much else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124466</id>
	<title>Do it all in Seldon's imagination</title>
	<author>gznork26</author>
	<datestamp>1265997600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About the only way I can imagine getting all of those flashy CGI battle scenes into Asimov's storyline is to show Seldon's fears. Start with him working out the details that run through a Crisis period, and have the datavis melt into his nightmare scenario of what would happen if he didn't head it off in time. That way, you get all the destruction Emmerich wants, and then you pan back out through the datavis and onto Seldon's face. He then crafts the countermove. Then we switch up to that future, and we see the events come together to the crisis moment, but then his recording turns on and warns everyone off. Rinse and rep[eat. End with a cliffhanger, the Mule trashing his programmed fix.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and if you liked that, check out "Burnout Fever", now available on Kindle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About the only way I can imagine getting all of those flashy CGI battle scenes into Asimov 's storyline is to show Seldon 's fears .
Start with him working out the details that run through a Crisis period , and have the datavis melt into his nightmare scenario of what would happen if he did n't head it off in time .
That way , you get all the destruction Emmerich wants , and then you pan back out through the datavis and onto Seldon 's face .
He then crafts the countermove .
Then we switch up to that future , and we see the events come together to the crisis moment , but then his recording turns on and warns everyone off .
Rinse and rep [ eat .
End with a cliffhanger , the Mule trashing his programmed fix .
...and if you liked that , check out " Burnout Fever " , now available on Kindle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About the only way I can imagine getting all of those flashy CGI battle scenes into Asimov's storyline is to show Seldon's fears.
Start with him working out the details that run through a Crisis period, and have the datavis melt into his nightmare scenario of what would happen if he didn't head it off in time.
That way, you get all the destruction Emmerich wants, and then you pan back out through the datavis and onto Seldon's face.
He then crafts the countermove.
Then we switch up to that future, and we see the events come together to the crisis moment, but then his recording turns on and warns everyone off.
Rinse and rep[eat.
End with a cliffhanger, the Mule trashing his programmed fix.
...and if you liked that, check out "Burnout Fever", now available on Kindle.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122480</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>zach\_the\_lizard</author>
	<datestamp>1265981520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can get some great movies with dialog alone. I had to watch one old movie for a class in high school, and I forget its title, but it was basically a jury talking about whether a man is innocent or not. It was black and white, with no effects that people of my generation have come to expect in movies. It had no action of any sort, just talking and the tension that comes from their arguments. It was, however, an awesome film. Better than most movies nowadays.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can get some great movies with dialog alone .
I had to watch one old movie for a class in high school , and I forget its title , but it was basically a jury talking about whether a man is innocent or not .
It was black and white , with no effects that people of my generation have come to expect in movies .
It had no action of any sort , just talking and the tension that comes from their arguments .
It was , however , an awesome film .
Better than most movies nowadays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can get some great movies with dialog alone.
I had to watch one old movie for a class in high school, and I forget its title, but it was basically a jury talking about whether a man is innocent or not.
It was black and white, with no effects that people of my generation have come to expect in movies.
It had no action of any sort, just talking and the tension that comes from their arguments.
It was, however, an awesome film.
Better than most movies nowadays.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122144</id>
	<title>What's even worse...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265980080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait until the moviegoing public decides that Trantor was just a rip-off of  <i>Star Wars'</i> Coruscant.  Or more likely, that the whole Empire is a rip-off of Star Wars.</p><p>Just something else Lucas will have to answer for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait until the moviegoing public decides that Trantor was just a rip-off of Star Wars ' Coruscant .
Or more likely , that the whole Empire is a rip-off of Star Wars.Just something else Lucas will have to answer for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait until the moviegoing public decides that Trantor was just a rip-off of  Star Wars' Coruscant.
Or more likely, that the whole Empire is a rip-off of Star Wars.Just something else Lucas will have to answer for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31149010</id>
	<title>The tool first, then the idea</title>
	<author>hrimhari</author>
	<datestamp>1266230700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Roland Emmerich: 'It has to be done all <b>CG</b> because <b>I would not know how to shoot this thing in real</b>.' (emphasis mine)</p><p>Whew, good thing CG has been around since the beginning of moving pictures!.. No, that can't be right. Oh yes! I got it now. There were not sci-fi movies until Star Wars Episode 1 came out!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Roland Emmerich : 'It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real .
' ( emphasis mine ) Whew , good thing CG has been around since the beginning of moving pictures ! . .
No , that ca n't be right .
Oh yes !
I got it now .
There were not sci-fi movies until Star Wars Episode 1 came out !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Roland Emmerich: 'It has to be done all CG because I would not know how to shoot this thing in real.
' (emphasis mine)Whew, good thing CG has been around since the beginning of moving pictures!..
No, that can't be right.
Oh yes!
I got it now.
There were not sci-fi movies until Star Wars Episode 1 came out!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122460</id>
	<title>i know thee words will fly out fo there mouths in</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265981460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3d<br>how special<br>end of movie</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3dhow specialend of movie</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3dhow specialend of movie</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123824</id>
	<title>NO NO NO!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265990940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take a small part of <i>Foundation</i>, say Seldons psychohistory and what that means against social progress, or some side plots that diverge from the trilogy, but dear god do not try and make the <i>Foundation</i> story. It would never transfer to the screen in a way that would either do it justice, or get it right. It is not possible to express the scope of ideas that the trilogy encompasses in a manner that will retain the creative freedom. Ultimately, everything would have to be refined to other meanings, inconsistent with the open interpretation that the book provokes.</p><p>Yes, it was said Dune was unmakeable, as well as the L.O.T.R trilogy. The <i>Foundation</i> isn't reserved to 'Middle Earth', or 'Arrakis', and isn't built upon the time-scale of a single generation of players like the other 2 were.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a small part of Foundation , say Seldons psychohistory and what that means against social progress , or some side plots that diverge from the trilogy , but dear god do not try and make the Foundation story .
It would never transfer to the screen in a way that would either do it justice , or get it right .
It is not possible to express the scope of ideas that the trilogy encompasses in a manner that will retain the creative freedom .
Ultimately , everything would have to be refined to other meanings , inconsistent with the open interpretation that the book provokes.Yes , it was said Dune was unmakeable , as well as the L.O.T.R trilogy .
The Foundation is n't reserved to 'Middle Earth ' , or 'Arrakis ' , and is n't built upon the time-scale of a single generation of players like the other 2 were .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a small part of Foundation, say Seldons psychohistory and what that means against social progress, or some side plots that diverge from the trilogy, but dear god do not try and make the Foundation story.
It would never transfer to the screen in a way that would either do it justice, or get it right.
It is not possible to express the scope of ideas that the trilogy encompasses in a manner that will retain the creative freedom.
Ultimately, everything would have to be refined to other meanings, inconsistent with the open interpretation that the book provokes.Yes, it was said Dune was unmakeable, as well as the L.O.T.R trilogy.
The Foundation isn't reserved to 'Middle Earth', or 'Arrakis', and isn't built upon the time-scale of a single generation of players like the other 2 were.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31133682</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>sincewhen</author>
	<datestamp>1266149760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You will often find that movies with much dialogue and little action are adaptations of plays.

<br> <br>
If you like that kind of thing then here's one you might like: <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0069281/" title="imdb.com">Sleuth</a> [imdb.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>You will often find that movies with much dialogue and little action are adaptations of plays .
If you like that kind of thing then here 's one you might like : Sleuth [ imdb.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You will often find that movies with much dialogue and little action are adaptations of plays.
If you like that kind of thing then here's one you might like: Sleuth [imdb.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121678</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>electrostatic</author>
	<datestamp>1265977920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That's the writing we have to look forward to?</p></div> </blockquote><p>
Playboy interview of James Cameron:<br>
PLAYBOY: How much do you get into celebrating your movie heroine's hotness?<br>
CAMERON: Right from the beginning I said, "She's got to have tits," even though that makes no sense because her race, the Na'vi, aren't placental mammals.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the writing we have to look forward to ?
Playboy interview of James Cameron : PLAYBOY : How much do you get into celebrating your movie heroine 's hotness ?
CAMERON : Right from the beginning I said , " She 's got to have tits , " even though that makes no sense because her race , the Na'vi , are n't placental mammals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the writing we have to look forward to?
Playboy interview of James Cameron:
PLAYBOY: How much do you get into celebrating your movie heroine's hotness?
CAMERON: Right from the beginning I said, "She's got to have tits," even though that makes no sense because her race, the Na'vi, aren't placental mammals.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122932</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>straponego</author>
	<datestamp>1265983980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great; fine.  Nothing wrong with that.  Just don't market it by stealing the name, and nothing else, from something that only matters to people who read.  Because that's sort of-- no, that is absolutely-- lying.<br><br>And probably counterproductive!  How many people who don't read SF (or anything, really) will say "Hmm, Ow My Balls, or... Asimov?  I GOTTA SEE THAT!"   And how many of the people who are familiar with SF will appreciate an obvious bastardization?  Because bastardizers don't come more obvious than Roland Emmerich.<br><br>
&nbsp; (Though prior to this, he has only dumbed down hoary SF cliches, not specific works).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great ; fine .
Nothing wrong with that .
Just do n't market it by stealing the name , and nothing else , from something that only matters to people who read .
Because that 's sort of-- no , that is absolutely-- lying.And probably counterproductive !
How many people who do n't read SF ( or anything , really ) will say " Hmm , Ow My Balls , or... Asimov ? I GOT TA SEE THAT !
" And how many of the people who are familiar with SF will appreciate an obvious bastardization ?
Because bastardizers do n't come more obvious than Roland Emmerich .
  ( Though prior to this , he has only dumbed down hoary SF cliches , not specific works ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great; fine.
Nothing wrong with that.
Just don't market it by stealing the name, and nothing else, from something that only matters to people who read.
Because that's sort of-- no, that is absolutely-- lying.And probably counterproductive!
How many people who don't read SF (or anything, really) will say "Hmm, Ow My Balls, or... Asimov?  I GOTTA SEE THAT!
"   And how many of the people who are familiar with SF will appreciate an obvious bastardization?
Because bastardizers don't come more obvious than Roland Emmerich.
  (Though prior to this, he has only dumbed down hoary SF cliches, not specific works).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122450</id>
	<title>I can see it now...</title>
	<author>Chicken\_Kickers</author>
	<datestamp>1265981400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>brilliant but handsome Hari Seldon (played by Russel Crowe) is accused of treason and is on the run from the Galactic Empire after prophesying the fall of the Empire. We will see Trantor in all its CG glory as a copy of Coruscant which was a copy of Trantor in the first place. We will also see the decadence and corruption prevalent in the Empire through a series of melodramatic montages of oppression and bacchanal scenes. There will be thrilling CG chases and fights through out the labyrinthine corridors on Trantor. Hari Seldon will raise a rag-tag band of plucky followers but eventually, he is captured after a tense Mexican stand-off and is put on trial. There will then be nail-biting court sequences where Hari Seldon forcefully defends his prediction but all seems lost when the Establishment had already made their mind. He is sentenced to death but on his execution day, his followers sprung him from jail and they departed in exile to a far away uninhabited planet called Terminus. There will be Moses-like scenes where the colony ship they are in are chased by miles-long Imperial battlecruisers but superior technology secretly developed by Hari Seldon will save the day. They managed to destroy the pursuing battlecruisers in a BSG-esque space battle and limped on to Terminus. On landing, there will be a poignant close-up shot of Hari Seldon's face looking at the stars, followed by him vowing to set up a Foundation to save humanity. Then a dramatic seamless CG zoom out to see the planet, then the solar system, then the star clusters and then finally the whole galaxy. The end.</htmltext>
<tokenext>brilliant but handsome Hari Seldon ( played by Russel Crowe ) is accused of treason and is on the run from the Galactic Empire after prophesying the fall of the Empire .
We will see Trantor in all its CG glory as a copy of Coruscant which was a copy of Trantor in the first place .
We will also see the decadence and corruption prevalent in the Empire through a series of melodramatic montages of oppression and bacchanal scenes .
There will be thrilling CG chases and fights through out the labyrinthine corridors on Trantor .
Hari Seldon will raise a rag-tag band of plucky followers but eventually , he is captured after a tense Mexican stand-off and is put on trial .
There will then be nail-biting court sequences where Hari Seldon forcefully defends his prediction but all seems lost when the Establishment had already made their mind .
He is sentenced to death but on his execution day , his followers sprung him from jail and they departed in exile to a far away uninhabited planet called Terminus .
There will be Moses-like scenes where the colony ship they are in are chased by miles-long Imperial battlecruisers but superior technology secretly developed by Hari Seldon will save the day .
They managed to destroy the pursuing battlecruisers in a BSG-esque space battle and limped on to Terminus .
On landing , there will be a poignant close-up shot of Hari Seldon 's face looking at the stars , followed by him vowing to set up a Foundation to save humanity .
Then a dramatic seamless CG zoom out to see the planet , then the solar system , then the star clusters and then finally the whole galaxy .
The end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>brilliant but handsome Hari Seldon (played by Russel Crowe) is accused of treason and is on the run from the Galactic Empire after prophesying the fall of the Empire.
We will see Trantor in all its CG glory as a copy of Coruscant which was a copy of Trantor in the first place.
We will also see the decadence and corruption prevalent in the Empire through a series of melodramatic montages of oppression and bacchanal scenes.
There will be thrilling CG chases and fights through out the labyrinthine corridors on Trantor.
Hari Seldon will raise a rag-tag band of plucky followers but eventually, he is captured after a tense Mexican stand-off and is put on trial.
There will then be nail-biting court sequences where Hari Seldon forcefully defends his prediction but all seems lost when the Establishment had already made their mind.
He is sentenced to death but on his execution day, his followers sprung him from jail and they departed in exile to a far away uninhabited planet called Terminus.
There will be Moses-like scenes where the colony ship they are in are chased by miles-long Imperial battlecruisers but superior technology secretly developed by Hari Seldon will save the day.
They managed to destroy the pursuing battlecruisers in a BSG-esque space battle and limped on to Terminus.
On landing, there will be a poignant close-up shot of Hari Seldon's face looking at the stars, followed by him vowing to set up a Foundation to save humanity.
Then a dramatic seamless CG zoom out to see the planet, then the solar system, then the star clusters and then finally the whole galaxy.
The end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121960</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>dpilot</author>
	<datestamp>1265979180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget one of Asimov's characters, early in the Foundation years, with that immortal line, "The galaxy's going to pot!"  Maybe this choice of writer is a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget one of Asimov 's characters , early in the Foundation years , with that immortal line , " The galaxy 's going to pot !
" Maybe this choice of writer is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget one of Asimov's characters, early in the Foundation years, with that immortal line, "The galaxy's going to pot!
"  Maybe this choice of writer is a good thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122844</id>
	<title>Re:Hey, you forgot the best part!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265983320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     Well, done poorly, a movie version of Foundation will be a real travesty.  It'll be difficult to turn into a movie but doable.  The gimmick-free use for 3D in Foundation I think would be for some (beginning of) BladeRunner-style cruising along Terminus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , done poorly , a movie version of Foundation will be a real travesty .
It 'll be difficult to turn into a movie but doable .
The gimmick-free use for 3D in Foundation I think would be for some ( beginning of ) BladeRunner-style cruising along Terminus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     Well, done poorly, a movie version of Foundation will be a real travesty.
It'll be difficult to turn into a movie but doable.
The gimmick-free use for 3D in Foundation I think would be for some (beginning of) BladeRunner-style cruising along Terminus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31126308</id>
	<title>Fail</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266070380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who hires an action director to make a CG version of a book that is nothing but people talking?</p><p>I love Asimov, and I am all for his works being made even more well-known through the use of more modern/advanced forms of media, but I hope this things fails, miserably, and ends the career of all those involved so that they never ruin another thing again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who hires an action director to make a CG version of a book that is nothing but people talking ? I love Asimov , and I am all for his works being made even more well-known through the use of more modern/advanced forms of media , but I hope this things fails , miserably , and ends the career of all those involved so that they never ruin another thing again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who hires an action director to make a CG version of a book that is nothing but people talking?I love Asimov, and I am all for his works being made even more well-known through the use of more modern/advanced forms of media, but I hope this things fails, miserably, and ends the career of all those involved so that they never ruin another thing again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125122</id>
	<title>probably refering to prelude to the foundation</title>
	<author>chichilalescu</author>
	<datestamp>1266092580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I assume that's what they're trying to film. It could work, but it doesn't really make sense. They're only purpose is to make money.<br>Also Foundation's Edge and Foundation and the Earth might work. But I sincerely doubt that the people who get the books would need a movie to spoil the way they imagined them, and I doubt that they really need to spoil these books just to make more money.<br>By the way, I liked the way they made "I, robot". It was probably one of the good ways to combine all the stories into a movie that made sense as a movie.</p><p>But the Foundation series...? Why not film "Yoda: the beginnings" or just plain old follow up to "Avatar: Body snatchers from the planet Earth". They'd still make money, without all the hard thinking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I assume that 's what they 're trying to film .
It could work , but it does n't really make sense .
They 're only purpose is to make money.Also Foundation 's Edge and Foundation and the Earth might work .
But I sincerely doubt that the people who get the books would need a movie to spoil the way they imagined them , and I doubt that they really need to spoil these books just to make more money.By the way , I liked the way they made " I , robot " .
It was probably one of the good ways to combine all the stories into a movie that made sense as a movie.But the Foundation series... ?
Why not film " Yoda : the beginnings " or just plain old follow up to " Avatar : Body snatchers from the planet Earth " .
They 'd still make money , without all the hard thinking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I assume that's what they're trying to film.
It could work, but it doesn't really make sense.
They're only purpose is to make money.Also Foundation's Edge and Foundation and the Earth might work.
But I sincerely doubt that the people who get the books would need a movie to spoil the way they imagined them, and I doubt that they really need to spoil these books just to make more money.By the way, I liked the way they made "I, robot".
It was probably one of the good ways to combine all the stories into a movie that made sense as a movie.But the Foundation series...?
Why not film "Yoda: the beginnings" or just plain old follow up to "Avatar: Body snatchers from the planet Earth".
They'd still make money, without all the hard thinking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>PotatoFarmer</author>
	<datestamp>1265977620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's not be hasty here.  Emmerich has done a lot of movies, some of them have to be good.
<br> <br>
*takes a quick stroll over to IMDB*
<br> <br>
Well, shit.  Guess we're boned, eh?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's not be hasty here .
Emmerich has done a lot of movies , some of them have to be good .
* takes a quick stroll over to IMDB * Well , shit .
Guess we 're boned , eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's not be hasty here.
Emmerich has done a lot of movies, some of them have to be good.
*takes a quick stroll over to IMDB*
 
Well, shit.
Guess we're boned, eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123256</id>
	<title>Playing the Mule?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265986080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sarah Jessica Parker.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sarah Jessica Parker .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sarah Jessica Parker.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123878</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>ultracool</author>
	<datestamp>1265991480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought ID4 was awesome when I saw it. But then I was also 12 at the time...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought ID4 was awesome when I saw it .
But then I was also 12 at the time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought ID4 was awesome when I saw it.
But then I was also 12 at the time...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122992</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>xrobertcmx</author>
	<datestamp>1265984280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I did like Moon 44.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did like Moon 44 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did like Moon 44.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122164</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1265980140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How, exactly, do you propose to have the audience experience the awesome and unique power of The Mule <i>without</i> 3D?! Luddite!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>How , exactly , do you propose to have the audience experience the awesome and unique power of The Mule without 3D ? !
Luddite ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How, exactly, do you propose to have the audience experience the awesome and unique power of The Mule without 3D?!
Luddite!!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31157062</id>
	<title>SHOOT THE RAYDOME</title>
	<author>FF8Jake</author>
	<datestamp>1266345060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dr. Emmerich designed Metal Gear "Rex", and its only weakness is the raydome. Unless any of you fags are packing stinger missiles, chaff grenades and rations, you'd best be bowing to your new overlord.

No I did not read TFA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dr. Emmerich designed Metal Gear " Rex " , and its only weakness is the raydome .
Unless any of you fags are packing stinger missiles , chaff grenades and rations , you 'd best be bowing to your new overlord .
No I did not read TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dr. Emmerich designed Metal Gear "Rex", and its only weakness is the raydome.
Unless any of you fags are packing stinger missiles, chaff grenades and rations, you'd best be bowing to your new overlord.
No I did not read TFA.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31128298</id>
	<title>Re:Help us Hari Seldon, You're Our Only Hope!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266086640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll do what I can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll do what I can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll do what I can.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125098</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Ozymandias\_KoK</author>
	<datestamp>1266092160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but ID4 was simply an action movie, and Foundation is about a lot of thinkin' and such.  That leaves out the example of story raping -- consider if the movie that we watched as ID4 had actually been called something else, like say...Footfall.  And maybe you've heard what happened with Starship Troopers?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but ID4 was simply an action movie , and Foundation is about a lot of thinkin ' and such .
That leaves out the example of story raping -- consider if the movie that we watched as ID4 had actually been called something else , like say...Footfall .
And maybe you 've heard what happened with Starship Troopers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but ID4 was simply an action movie, and Foundation is about a lot of thinkin' and such.
That leaves out the example of story raping -- consider if the movie that we watched as ID4 had actually been called something else, like say...Footfall.
And maybe you've heard what happened with Starship Troopers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121676</id>
	<title>Re:Oh My God, THE Roland Emmerich?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265977920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I'd rather take a bullet to the head than see.</p></div></blockquote><p>We're going to hold you to that promise.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I 'd rather take a bullet to the head than see.We 're going to hold you to that promise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like these executive producers are betting on a winning horse that I'd rather take a bullet to the head than see.We're going to hold you to that promise.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123592</id>
	<title>Re:Asimov himself said nothing happens in Foundati</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265988900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except for "The Mule". It has a mysterious enemy (the Mule), a smart female protagonist (Bayta), a maverick who sees the threat early (Pritcher) and a plot twist at the end. Add to that the backdrop of the  Foundation (i.e. the last hope for galactic civilization) losing a war due to psychic manipulation and it's almost a formulaic movie. They just need to build up the backstory of the Foundation well enough so that the Mule becomes as big a threat as he is in the novels. And get a good actor to play the Mule so that the ending is believable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except for " The Mule " .
It has a mysterious enemy ( the Mule ) , a smart female protagonist ( Bayta ) , a maverick who sees the threat early ( Pritcher ) and a plot twist at the end .
Add to that the backdrop of the Foundation ( i.e .
the last hope for galactic civilization ) losing a war due to psychic manipulation and it 's almost a formulaic movie .
They just need to build up the backstory of the Foundation well enough so that the Mule becomes as big a threat as he is in the novels .
And get a good actor to play the Mule so that the ending is believable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except for "The Mule".
It has a mysterious enemy (the Mule), a smart female protagonist (Bayta), a maverick who sees the threat early (Pritcher) and a plot twist at the end.
Add to that the backdrop of the  Foundation (i.e.
the last hope for galactic civilization) losing a war due to psychic manipulation and it's almost a formulaic movie.
They just need to build up the backstory of the Foundation well enough so that the Mule becomes as big a threat as he is in the novels.
And get a good actor to play the Mule so that the ending is believable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31127010</id>
	<title>The opening score</title>
	<author>smhanov</author>
	<datestamp>1266077220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I composed an overture for Trantor a few years ago: <a href="http://stevehanov.ca/trantor.mp3" title="stevehanov.ca" rel="nofollow">http://stevehanov.ca/trantor.mp3</a> [stevehanov.ca]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I composed an overture for Trantor a few years ago : http : //stevehanov.ca/trantor.mp3 [ stevehanov.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I composed an overture for Trantor a few years ago: http://stevehanov.ca/trantor.mp3 [stevehanov.ca]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123516</id>
	<title>It could be worse</title>
	<author>CorvisRex</author>
	<datestamp>1265988180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It could be Ewe Boll!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be Ewe Boll !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be Ewe Boll!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123546</id>
	<title>Words on play - play on words</title>
	<author>postagoras</author>
	<datestamp>1265988420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The quote is backwards, it was actually "I can't shoot this thing in real because it all has to be done in CG.'"</p><p>The first three books would be an excellent play, which is the heart of his problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The quote is backwards , it was actually " I ca n't shoot this thing in real because it all has to be done in CG .
' " The first three books would be an excellent play , which is the heart of his problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The quote is backwards, it was actually "I can't shoot this thing in real because it all has to be done in CG.
'"The first three books would be an excellent play, which is the heart of his problem.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122360</id>
	<title>I am looking forward to this...</title>
	<author>oscarwumpus</author>
	<datestamp>1265980920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I am looking forward to hating it. I hear you cry: "but you know nothing about it" And yet, still I avoid eating poo, without ever having tried it. Yes, I could be wrong, but I've seen 3-D ships going boom and i don't need two hours of digital space junk being thrown at me to prove the coolness of the 'new 3-D'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I am looking forward to hating it .
I hear you cry : " but you know nothing about it " And yet , still I avoid eating poo , without ever having tried it .
Yes , I could be wrong , but I 've seen 3-D ships going boom and i do n't need two hours of digital space junk being thrown at me to prove the coolness of the 'new 3-D' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I am looking forward to hating it.
I hear you cry: "but you know nothing about it" And yet, still I avoid eating poo, without ever having tried it.
Yes, I could be wrong, but I've seen 3-D ships going boom and i don't need two hours of digital space junk being thrown at me to prove the coolness of the 'new 3-D'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122128</id>
	<title>Please! Nooooo!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265980020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's going to be like a train wreck...something that one can't bear to watch, and yet one can't tear one's eyes away from.</p><p>For example, qoting from http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=59905#:</p><p>"On the other end, the "Foundation" is a similar problem in that you have all these short stories and then they were combined into a book and so in a way there is not one character and I spoke with the Rob and he said we have to consolidate the characters..."</p><p>So here you have this epic story that deliberately spans the generations to show how Seldon's grand plan is being played out (ignoring all the 'other' fuondations books that sort of watered things down) and Emmerich is going to "consoldiate the characters." WTF? Lazarus Long will be taking the starring role perhaps<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>Thisgs to look forward to, perhaps:</p><p>Maybe we'll see Salvor Hardin kicking Prince Regent Wienis' teeth out in a thrilling fight scene (can't see Emmerich taking the maxim "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" on board!).</p><p>Maybe we'll see Bel Riose blowing everything up as he closes in on Trantor. Lots of opportunity for a car chase (sorry...space battle...) scene here...</p><p>We can watch the Mule torture Captain Han Pritcher (in close up) into submission. Imagine the fun of seeing blood trickle down from Pritcher's nose and then realise (with a shock) that a burst blood vessel in his nose actually signifies how his will has been broken.</p><p>Maybe we'll see a bit of girl-on-girl action between Arkady Darrel and Lady Callia? In 3D!</p><p>No. No and thrice NO, I say!</p><p>Let's start up a "NO Foundation Film" petition!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's going to be like a train wreck...something that one ca n't bear to watch , and yet one ca n't tear one 's eyes away from.For example , qoting from http : //www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php ? id = 59905 # : " On the other end , the " Foundation " is a similar problem in that you have all these short stories and then they were combined into a book and so in a way there is not one character and I spoke with the Rob and he said we have to consolidate the characters... " So here you have this epic story that deliberately spans the generations to show how Seldon 's grand plan is being played out ( ignoring all the 'other ' fuondations books that sort of watered things down ) and Emmerich is going to " consoldiate the characters .
" WTF ?
Lazarus Long will be taking the starring role perhaps ; - ) Thisgs to look forward to , perhaps : Maybe we 'll see Salvor Hardin kicking Prince Regent Wienis ' teeth out in a thrilling fight scene ( ca n't see Emmerich taking the maxim " Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent " on board !
) .Maybe we 'll see Bel Riose blowing everything up as he closes in on Trantor .
Lots of opportunity for a car chase ( sorry...space battle... ) scene here...We can watch the Mule torture Captain Han Pritcher ( in close up ) into submission .
Imagine the fun of seeing blood trickle down from Pritcher 's nose and then realise ( with a shock ) that a burst blood vessel in his nose actually signifies how his will has been broken.Maybe we 'll see a bit of girl-on-girl action between Arkady Darrel and Lady Callia ?
In 3D ! No .
No and thrice NO , I say ! Let 's start up a " NO Foundation Film " petition !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's going to be like a train wreck...something that one can't bear to watch, and yet one can't tear one's eyes away from.For example, qoting from http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=59905#:"On the other end, the "Foundation" is a similar problem in that you have all these short stories and then they were combined into a book and so in a way there is not one character and I spoke with the Rob and he said we have to consolidate the characters..."So here you have this epic story that deliberately spans the generations to show how Seldon's grand plan is being played out (ignoring all the 'other' fuondations books that sort of watered things down) and Emmerich is going to "consoldiate the characters.
" WTF?
Lazarus Long will be taking the starring role perhaps ;-)Thisgs to look forward to, perhaps:Maybe we'll see Salvor Hardin kicking Prince Regent Wienis' teeth out in a thrilling fight scene (can't see Emmerich taking the maxim "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" on board!
).Maybe we'll see Bel Riose blowing everything up as he closes in on Trantor.
Lots of opportunity for a car chase (sorry...space battle...) scene here...We can watch the Mule torture Captain Han Pritcher (in close up) into submission.
Imagine the fun of seeing blood trickle down from Pritcher's nose and then realise (with a shock) that a burst blood vessel in his nose actually signifies how his will has been broken.Maybe we'll see a bit of girl-on-girl action between Arkady Darrel and Lady Callia?
In 3D!No.
No and thrice NO, I say!Let's start up a "NO Foundation Film" petition!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31126546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31129068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31128298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31133682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121960
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125098
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123592
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31132166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31130930
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121676
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123378
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31189508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_12_199243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31127332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122504
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123802
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122480
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31133682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31132166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31128298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122084
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121676
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121606
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122948
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31126546
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122992
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122932
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31130930
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31121646
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31129068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31189508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31122844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31123378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31124868
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_12_199243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_12_199243.31125570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
