ALL SCI-FI Forum Index ALL SCI-FI
The place to “find your people”.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

THE 27th DAY (1957)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the fact that to be acceptable a portion of the human race had to be eliminated and some needed to be "lobotomized" by the alien capsules was a very bothersome premis. Was the Human penchant toward violance the part that had to be eliminated?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17017
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maurice wrote:
My main comment remains that they refused to give the only non-white even one line of dialog. I am well aware it's of its time, but that was a chickenshit decision. Let's hear her concerns before she offs herself, let's let her espouse and then personify this Buddist way of thinking.

Sir, I believe you've misunderstood both the purpose of the Chinese girl's character and her extreme importance to the plot.

Please allow me to explain.

Five Earthlings are given weapons which could whip out all human life. The only people who can open the containers are the individuals to whom they were given.

The only way to prevent this tragedy is for each individual to keep the capsules away from absolutely everybody, because once a container is open, anybody can launch them.

But, as I stated earlier, the alien made certain that the people he chose were from the most powerful nations on Earth — and because of his world-wide announcement, they would very likely end up in the hands of the governments of those nations.



_________


Each of the five people attempted to prevent this, but in different ways. Gene Barry foolishly thought he could just hide the capsules until the 27 days had passed and the capsules automatically deactivated. But the alien announced to the world the names of the five individuals who received "information that concerns every human being" on Earth.

As a result, all five individuals were hunted by every nation.

The scientist (George Voskovec) was promptly hit by a car right after the alien's world-wide message, and he was taken to the hospital. He too wanted to hide the capsules, but his container was confiscated.

The Russian soldier (Azemat Janti) still had his capsules when he was quickly taken into custody, but he lied by claiming the alien had not told him and the others anything about the strange objects they'd been given.



_________


As with the other abductees, the young Russian soldier didn't want the weapons used to wipe out billions of people. But he was tortured for days to obtained the secret, and he finally gave in when his superiors falsely claimed that the Americans were planning to use the capsules to destroy their enemies.

Valerie French was more intelligent than the three men. She immediately tossed the container into the ocean when she got back to Earth. Smart girl.

(Not too bad lookin' either! Cool )



_________


But Marie Tsien (the Chinese girl) was the smartest of them all — as well as being incredibly brave and unselfish. Her basic nature (not her religious beliefs) made her realize that the only way to prevent the capsules from being used was to end her life and therefore render the weapons useless.


_________


And she did this within minutes of returning to Earth. She is the true hero of this story.

Maurice, you said the Chinese girl was denied having any dialog, and that you think we should have "heard her concerns" before she killed herself.

But I maintain that her very noble decision to sacrifice her life (without hesitation, so that the capsules could not be used) was a far more dramatic and interesting plot element than a verbal debate about what she wisely knew had to be done right away.

Su Tan is a key character in this fine story, the one human being who not only realized that billions of lives were at stake, but also faced the fact that the one sure way to prevent the annihilation of the human race was to commit suicide. And she had to do it before the soldiers arrived seconds later!



_________


If she had hesitated, the Chinese government would have gained possession of those devastating devices!

In other words, Maurice, the character you think was treated unfairly because —

" . . . she's the only one of the 5 who's non-white and also conveniently the only one who doesn't get a single line of dialog or any characterization AT ALL."

— was in fact the person who demonstrated the strongest moral character, and the one who made the ultimate sacrifice because of what was at stake!

The rest of the movie was basically the story of how the entire human race gradually realized that mankind must become as unselfish and generous as Su Tan had been.

Gene Barry's character was the cynic who eventually changed his negative view of mankind. The Russian soldier and the Chinese girl, however, showed their deep commitment to making moral choices, and they were ready to sacrifice themselves when it became necessary.

That's why the final scene in the film moves me so much. Gene Barry stated that the amazing events which recently transpired had, at least for a while, brought mankind together. We were NOT changed by what the capsules did to the survivors. We were changed by the knowledge that the aliens needed our help, and that we'd proven to ourselves that we were cable of doing great things as a morally responsible race.



_________


Concerning the period during which this film was made, for decades I've listened to people berate movies like this one as being the product of "cold war hysteria". They claim that Americans in the 1950s were suffering from paranoia caused by the threat of communism.

To that I say . . . horse manure.

The United States today is under a much greater threat from the harmful efforts made by Russia to undermine our political and economic systems. Vladimir Putin is a ruthless dictator who murders those who oppose him. He's guilty and mass murder in several instances. Russian computer hackers have influenced our elections and disrupted our economy.

What the Russians can do today is far worse than what they could do in the 1950s. I think maybe we aren't concerned enough about these dangers.

And as for the threat of nuclear war . . . well, the only difference between then and now is that the missiles will be coming from the West instead of the East! Shocked

The deranged knucklehead shown below is crazier than Khrushchev ever was! This man has promised to "liberate" South Korean and reduce America to ashes.

With that in mind, I think the phrase used in The 27th Day — "known enemies of human freedom" — suits both him and Vladimir Putin perfectly.



_______________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:57 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A very persuasive reply, Bud, and I can't generally refute most of your arguments. But, on a couple of points..... On Su Tan...

Bud said:

"Her basic nature (not her religious beliefs) made her realize that the only way to prevent the capsules from being used was to end her life and therefore render the weapons useless."

Su Tan clearly was influenced by her religious philosophy. In the very picture you posted it shows her kneeling before the statue of the Buddha before she commits suicide. Her beliefs framed her view on the world and existence and prompted her behavior. Morality is not entirely an inherited genetic thing, but is shaped over time by our connection to intangible elements of religion, logic and ones sense of identity.

Buddhism is not just a "religion" as it is an examination of "truth and wisdom", a trait found in many Eastern "religions" like Taoism and Confucianism. The concepts go all the way back to the Egyptians and their concept of Maat, Balance, justice and truth.

Her "inherent" goodness was strengthened by her Buddhist faith. Her strength came from her attaining a peaceful calm. She may have even transcended to being a Bodhisattva. In short, she was the product of not only her "inherent" goodness but her reaching the point of her Buddhist Nirvana.

The other point I would make is that this is NOT primarily a science fiction film as it is predominantly a morality play. The plot holes as far as the capability of these capsules and the motives of the aliens are irrelevant to the basic idea "The unexamined life is not worth living." It is said that our own morality is shaped by what you do when no one is watching.

This is a significant film because it causes us to delve into it like this and examine ourselves and our own sense of morality and ethics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Maurice
Mission Specialist


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 460
Location: 3rd Rock

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can refute it.

She's not allowed to have an opinion or express it either through word or action other than offing herself. Even on the spaceship she passively picks up the device when told to. If you were a pacifist, would you pick up a ticking bomb that you were told was going home with you? She could have refused, and The Alien could have then told her that she can't refuse, or if she does, someone who will take the weapon will be found instead, in which case she'd take it and off herself to prevent anyone getting it. Or find herself back on Earth with it even when she threw it back. That's drama. That's a character making a decision. That's five times as much personality as she's allowed to have, and would have made her sacrificial action land harder. And she wouldn't even have to speak.

But no. She is utterly passive every step of the way except offing herself. She's a non-character whose thoughts we must infer from the single action she is allowed to make.

Weak.

_________________
* * *
"The absence of limitations is the enemy of art."
― Orson Welles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17017
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

So the bottom line, Maurice, is that you didn't like the fact that the humble Chinese peasant girl acted like a humble Chines peasant girl.

And even when she broke from her station in life and did something remarkably brave, unselfish, and absolutely necessary for the salvation of the human race . . . it still wasn't enough for you.

Yes, there are an infinite number of things the writers could have done with the character, but I think what they did do was realistic, heroic, and perfectly consistent with the premise of the story.

What it boils down to, I think, is that you reject the film's message, so you reject the way it was presented.

I respect your opinion, sir. But I'm glad I don't share it so that I can enjoy this fine movie.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:17 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maurice wrote:
She's not allowed to have an opinion or express it either through word or action other than offing herself.

Ah, Maurice....She said so much more by her actions than any words could have conveyed. She spoke the loudest of them all by not only words, but deeds.

She embodied the Buddhist philosophy of passive resistance and the peace of the calm. She found the elegant solution of negating her threat by rendering the capsules inert by her death. Her existence on this plane was brought full circle by her deed.

No Maurice, she was the LOUDEST voice of the group by her decision.

The next bravest was the Russian soldier. He suffered torture and pain in a very Christ-like way.

The cowards of the group were Barry and the English girl. The former tried to hide away from it while the latter tried to throw it away.

What we say ...is meaningless....What we DO is powerful. Of all the recipients of the capsules she spoke the loudest and was the most dramatic!

I could only hope to have the strength and conviction shown by this one peasant woman. She was the ONE character in this film that transcended all the rest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Krel
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have never seen the entire movie, but I did read the novel in the early 70s. As I recall, it was pretty much a ruse by the Aliens to see if mankind was mature enough to join the interstellar civilization. If mankind passed the test, then we would be welcomed in. If mankind failed the test...Well then there would be an empty planet for colonization. We passed.

Now I could be remembering wrong, it has been over 40 years since I read the book. But if I'm right, the book had a better ending.

David.
Back to top
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17017
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

I read the book back in the 1960s too, David, but I don't remember the aspect of the plot you mentioned. However, I can't imagine a better ending than the one in the movie, and I really love the idea that the aliens in the film were offered the friendship and hospitality of human race.

I think it was that act of generosity on our part which caused the aliens to welcome us into their interstellar society in the climax. They didn't "judge us worthy" because we passed a test of some kind. They simply responded to our willingness to help them in a time of need by accepting us into their own society as well.

Instead of a "alien invasion" story, it became an "alien invitation" story! Very Happy

I'm glad the screenplay is by the novel's author, John Mantley. It's good to know that he was able to convert his own novel into the filmed version.

The idea that the aliens in the film refused to take our planet by force was noble, and they strongly suspected we were going to wipe ourselves out eventually anyway, so they gambled that we might do it quick and clean with their scary little capsules.

I know that idea embodies some very sticky moral issues, but it's still a very interesting concept. However, both the movie and the novel include the fascinating idea that the aliens did NOT simply give us a weapon which would destroy us all, they also gave us a device which sort of "sped up evolution" in terms of our moral development.

And there lies another difference between the movie and the book. As I mentioned in a post above, the secondary mode of the capsules (in the book) caused an alteration in people's basic nature, rather than simply "killing all the bad folks".

The capsules' effects somehow reduced the "bad" tendencies from everybody, which meant that people who were mostly "good" hardly noticed any difference, whereas people who were mostly bad were so altered that they actually died because the process!

Yes, I know — it's an idea that sounds good in principal, but it opens up all kinds of moral questions.

The movie version is actually a bit easier to accept. If someone's mind is so completely filled with hate and destructive thoughts that they're a serious danger to everyone else, they died from the effects caused by the capsules. No one else was affected at all.

I'm not condoning the idea. Just analyzing the concept. Very Happy

I wonder if there's a website which offers a free read of the novel. I'll try to find one and post the link here.



_________________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:53 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Krel
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I maybe remembering it wrong, but as I recall the book went pretty much like the movie. But the surprise came at the end, where when Earth offers the Aliens sanctuary, the Aliens admit it was a test, and offers Earth membership into the interstellar union.

David.
Back to top
scotpens
Starship Captain


Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 871
Location: The Left Coast

PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud Brewster wrote:
. . . As I mentioned in a post above, the secondary mode of the capsules (in the book) caused an alteration in people's basic nature, rather than simply "killing all the bad folks".

The capsules' effects somehow reduced the "bad" tendencies from everybody, which meant that people who were mostly "good" hardly noticed any difference, whereas people who were mostly bad were so altered that they actually died because the process!

Yes, I know — it's an idea that sounds good in principle, but it opens up all kinds of moral questions.

No, it does not sound good in principle. What we're talking about is mind control -- eliminating free will and essentially turning people into automatons.

No one can be forced to be a "good" person. To quote from Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange: "Goodness is something chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Krel
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

scotpens wrote:
No, it does not sound good in principle. What we're talking about is mind control -- eliminating free will and essentially turning people into automatons.

No one can be forced to be a "good" person. To quote from Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange: "Goodness is something chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man."

But it could possibly be used to make a very compliant populace. No worries about people revolting against your polices.

When I was a kid I used to read my Brother's Doc Savage books. One thing bothered me was Doc's Crime College, where criminals were operated on to remove their criminal tendencies. Kind of frighting to a 7/8 year old.

David.
Back to top
orzel-w
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 1877

PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What price has man paid over the centuries for the "benefit" of claiming to have free will? It's actually been enjoyed to full effect by only a minority of the human race historically. A wealthy and powerful few have exercised their own free will to limit that of the greater portion of the population.

Nowadays we're witnessing the exercise of free will of individuals who choose to explode bombs and fire guns into crowds of people, thereby terminating the victims' further enjoyment of free will.

With the majority of the human race choosing (of their own free will) to live peacefully in harmony with those around them, what can we say in defense of the free will of those few who choose to deprive as many others as possible of their right to choose freely? "Hey, at least the perpetrators got to live as 'men'."

_________________
...or not...

WayneO
-----------
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17017
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Bear in mind that the author of the novel who said the capsules made people more peaceful is the same guy who changed that in the movie. The film version stated that the capsules killed all the people with extremely violent tendencies like you described, Wayne.

The movie referred to them as the "enemies of human freedom".

So, in defense of the movie, it didn't claim that the capsules made everyone more "peaceful". Instead the capsules somehow detected the violent insanity which infects suicide bombers, mass snipers, and ruthless dictators. And the capsules didn't make them more peaceful either. They just killed the bastards.

However, just to put things into perspective, the next generation of people will have the same human failings. Admittedly a large number of lunatics were removed from the current gene pool, but humanity was basically unchanged in the long run.

On the other hand, my reply to scotpen's comment below is in defense of the novel.


scotpens wrote:
What we're talking about is mind control -- eliminating free will and essentially turning people into automatons.

Not necessarily.

Drugs which treat mental disorders caused by harmful chemical imbalances in the brain aren't "mind control". So, what if the capsules actually improved brain functions and increased both a person's intelligence and their ability to feel empathy. They say that sociopaths lack that ability, and that's what causes their harmful behavior.

Sociopath - A person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gord Green
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 06 Oct 2014
Posts: 2940
Location: Buffalo, NY

PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud, I think your misunderstanding about the Chinese girl comes from your basic misunderstanding about the effect of Buddhism on the development of her character.

Basically, as it would apply to her the following is a basic description of how Buddhism affected her.

From the screenshot you displayed you can see that the screenplay author clearly wanted to it be known that her faith was responsible for her actions.



A central aspect of Buddhist theory of karma is that intent (cetanā) matters and is essential to bring about a consequence or phala "fruit" or vipāka "result".

However, good or bad karma accumulates even if there is no physical action, and just having ill or good thoughts create karmic seeds; thus, actions of body, speech or mind all lead to karmic seeds.

In the Buddhist traditions, life aspects affected by the law of karma in past and current births of a being include the form of rebirth, realm of rebirth, social class, character and major circumstances of a lifetime.

It operates like the laws of physics, without external intervention, on every being in all six realms of existence including human beings and gods.

A notable aspect of the karma theory in Buddhism is merit transfer.

A person accumulates merit not only through intentions and ethical living, but also is able to gain merit from others by exchanging goods and services, such as through dāna (charity to monks or nuns).

The five precepts (panca-sila) are moral behavioural and ritual guidelines for lay devotees in Buddhism, while those following a monastic life have rules of conduct

The five precepts apply to both male and female devotees, and these are

1. Abstain from killing (1. Ahimsa);

2. Abstain from stealing;

3. Abstain from sensual (including sexual) misconduct;

4. Abstain from lying;

5. Abstain from intoxicants.

These precepts are not commandments and transgressions do not invite religious sanctions, but their power has been in the Buddhist belief in karmic consequences and their impact in afterlife during rebirth.

Killing in Buddhist belief leads to rebirth in the hellish realm, and for a longer time in more severe conditions if the murder victim was a monk. To many, Buddhism goes beyond religion and is more of a philosophy or 'way of life'. It is a philosophy because philosophy 'means love of wisdom' and the Buddhist path can be summed up as:

(1) to lead a moral life,

(2) to be mindful and aware of thoughts and actions, and

(3) to develop wisdom and understanding.

The moral code within Buddhism is the precepts, of which the main five are: not to take the life of anything living, not to take anything not freely given, to abstain from sexual misconduct and sensual overindulgence, to refrain from untrue speech, and to avoid intoxication, that is, losing mindfulness.

Karma is the law that every cause has an effect, i.e., our actions have results. This simple law explains a number of things: inequality in the world, why some are born handicapped and some gifted, why some live only a short life. Karma underlines the importance of all individuals being responsible for their past and present actions.

How can we test the karmic effect of our actions? The answer is summed up by looking at

(1) the intention behind the action,

(2) effects of the action on oneself, and

(3) the effects on others.

These last precepts explain why she acted as she did. Her screen time was short, but memerable, and exemplified her actions as within the precepts of Buddhism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17017
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Gordon, I'm pretty sure you're overthinking this.

I still staunchly maintain that Mantley's intention was simply to present an intelligent and responsible young woman who knew she was in possession of three terrible hi-tech weapons which the Chinese government would use to wipe out all of North and South America, exactly the way the Russia's planned to do.

As I've said several times, it had nothing to do with her religious beliefs. In fact, Su Tan is shown kneeling before the Buddhist statue and committing hari kari simply because back in the 1950s that's the kind of thing American's thought Asians did!

Actually, hari kair (aka Seppuku) is a Japanese custom. Not Chinese. And I found this item when I Googled the subject.

Confucianism and Buddhism does not sanction suicide, so it was not so common in China. The specific form of suicide Seppuku (aka stomach cutting) is uniquely Japanese and uniquely for the warrior class.

Therefore, the idea that Su Tan killed herself because she was a devoted Buddhist isn't consistent with her nationality or her religion!

So, why did she kill herself? Here's my theory.

When she returned to Earth she was smack in the middle of an area where soldiers were brutally murdering civilians — one of which was a young man whose body Su Tan was kneeling next to when the alien beamed her up to his ship in the earlier scene.






When she returned, she knew the soldiers would take the strange container from her if she was captured. Her only hope for preventing the deaths of millions of people if the capsules fell into the hands of her government was to kill herself and deactivate the capsules.

I think that any truly good and unselfish person would have realized the absolute need to do this, regardless of their religious beliefs.

Unlike Gene Barry and George Voskovec (the professor), Su Tan was not in a safe place where there was no immediate need to deal with the dangerous alien weapons. Valerie French, as we know, chose to dispose of the capsules quickly, a very wise move on her part.






But consider Azemat Janti (the Russian soldier).

He was apprehended soon after returning to Earth, and his capsules were confiscated. And yet he demonstrated the same determination as Su Tan to prevent his government from using the capsules to destroy their enemies.

The young soldier is never given the chance to commit suicide. However, moments before the capsules were about to be launched by the Russian general, he makes a desperate attempt to stop it, even though he knew full well that the guards surrounding him would gun him down if he did.






In fact, he may actually have hoped they would kill him! We even hear the general shout, "You fools! Don't shoot! If he dies the capsules are useless!"





Here's my point. If a Russian soldier, serving in a country of avowed atheist under the anti-religious campaign of the Khrushchev era can show the same determination Su Tan did to save his country's enemies, why do you insist that Su Tan's primary motivation was her devotion to her religion?

Yes, Su Tan certainly seemed to be a Buddhist. But Buddhism does not condone suicide. So, why did she do it? I think it was because she knew what was at stake, as did the other four abductees.

They were all people of good character who understood the terrifying responsibility they had been given. The primary motivation of their actions was their knowledge that the entire human race might be annihilated.

That's why I object to the suggestion that Su Tan was motivated by anything other than that all-important moral imperative — especially in view of the fact that author John Mantley specifically included a soldier in the Russian army who was just as willing as Su Tan to give his life to save the victims of the weapons!

As I said, the statue of the Buddha and the method Su Tan used to kill herself were just standard Hollywood's trappings when presenting an Asian character. But her reason for killing herself was a pure and noble sacrifice to save the potential victims of the alien weapon.

Perhaps I'm wrong about all this, Gordon. I'd really like to know if my assumptions about Mantley's intentions are correct. With that in mind, I've ordered the novel from Amazon, and it will arrive on or before November 3rd.

Hopefully the section that describes Su Tan's actions will say something which clarifies exactly why the author had her commit suicide. I promise to quote the relative section on this thread when the book comes, whether it proves me right, wrong, or neither one.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:02 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group