Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Image

In Praise of the Sci-fi Corridor 171

Posted by samzenpus
from the getting-there-is-half-the-fun dept.
brumgrunt writes "Technically a corridor in a science-fiction movie should just be a means of getting from one big expensive set to the next, and yet Den Of Geek writes lovingly of the detailed conduits in films such as Alien, Outland, Solaris and even this year's Moon by Duncan Jones."

*

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

In Praise of the Sci-fi Corridor

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:08AM (#29300025)
    They should do the next article on technology in scifi movies that DOESN'T go horribly wrong or lead to some nightmarish dystopia.
    • by gad_zuki! (70830)

      Without drama and conflict there's no story. Would you pay to see a story about a guy who went about his day in the future and didnt have any problems or anything interesting happen to him?

      Perhaps someone can combine twitter with scifi:

      futureguy: I am using my future toilet
      futureguy: I am driving my futurecar
      futureguy: I am sleeping in my futurebed

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by hal2814 (725639)

        I don't know. I thought the Jetsons had a pretty long run.

        • So did the Teletubbies and Barney the Dinosaur. But then kids shows tend to be held to a different standard when it comes to drama and conflict.
        • by gnick (1211984)

          Future tech caused huge drama in the Jetsons' universe. Do you not remember the ongoing epic battle between Cogsley's Cogs and Spacely's Sprockets?

      • by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:37AM (#29300455)
        Yeah, but there are also tired cliches (like the robot/computer that goes nuts and starts mercilessly killing humans). One of the reasons I liked the recent Moon [wikipedia.org] is because it subverted that tired cliche.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Idiocracy may reach extreme levels and an AI born from the technological singularity may control everything.

        People may even have a total lack of privacy.

        As long as everyone is confortable (lack of privacy is not uncomfortable by itself, it's the negative reactions of the other people and your broken expectations that do it.) and entertained, nobody will care.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Minwee (522556)

          As long as everyone is confortable and entertained, nobody will care.

          Until some dickhead wearing mirror shades and a black trenchcoat came around and wrecked everything. That part would really suck.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LitelySalted (1348425)

        He's not saying the future shouldn't have conflict, he's saying that future doesn't need to always emphasize how horrible EVERYTHING will turn out to be.

        That's why people like Star Trek movies, they have conflict, but at the same time, they point out that the future can be bright, technology can be helpful, people can be happy and life is worth living.

        Back to the main topic, corridors - they are cheap for filming. That probably influenced the reason to use them more than a necessity in "Sci-Fi" films. I r

        • by gnick (1211984)

          Cube was entertaining in several regards. I dug the fact that the set was, as you mentioned, a couple of cubes. I dug the underlying premise of the government project gone awry. But for a lot of the smaller details, you really had to turn your brain off.

          Still it's certainly unique enough to be included in a discussion on sci-fi corridors. The corridors were square holes leading to an identical cube. How cool is that?

          Not sci-fi, but Closet Land also ranks on minimal set design. Basically it's 2 people

      • I might watch it if Ken Loach directed it
      • by commodore64_love (1445365) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:52AM (#29300581) Journal

        >>>Would you pay to see a story about a guy who went about his day in the future and didnt have any problems

        No but that doesn't mean you have to go extreme either. I thought the best Science Stories were those that took ordinary genres, but set them in the future:

        - Elijah Baley - a detective solving a murder in the year ~3,000

        - Tekwar - a detective solving crimes in ~2020

        - The Road Must Roll - a worker strike in the year ~2050

        - I Robot - a collection of short stories where a household appliance (robot) goes haywire, and the engineer's attempt to find why the problem happened.

        And so on. Science stories are best when they are tied to reality. It doesn't have to be some "nightmarish reality" to quote the grandparent..

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Noren (605012)
          I must quibble- although Heinlein's short story "The Roads Must Roll"(1940) did not specify a setting date in its text, it was set in the same continuity in and occured prior to "The Man who Sold the Moon"(1949), which was set in the then-future of 1978. So, the strike (and associated terrorist activity) was to have been in the then-future 1960s or 1970s, not in 2050.
        • - I Robot - a collection of short stories where a household appliance (robot) goes haywire, and the engineer's attempt to find why the problem happened.

          No, I Robot is a musing on the utter inadequacy of a simple set of rules to reflect any sort of morality - there's always some conflict between what the rules allow and what's right.

          • No, I Robot is a musing on the utter inadequacy of a simple set of rules to reflect any sort of morality - there's always some conflict between what the rules allow and what's right.

            no, not really. You just need to write more than three of them.

            Asimov's whole premise would have been destroyed by a simple "Rule 0: no robot may perform a task beyond its design."

      • by gbjbaanb (229885)

        Well, 2001: A Space Odyssey [imdb.com] did have nothing but flashing lights that everyone stared at for what seemed like hours.

        At least it seemed to take that long, and I wasn't even stoned!

        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by Whorhay (1319089)
          That was easily one of the worst movies I have ever forced myself to sit down and watch. I still remember the twenty minute scene where the spaceship/rocket is landing on the moon or something. I kept waiting for it to explode or for something to go wrong. Pretty much anything to happen except for it to slowly, slowly, slowly descend and have a completely uneventful landing. It wasn't even like the landing sequence was complicated and interesting to watch.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by onionman (975962)

            Really? I thought 2001 was one of the best movies I had ever seen, and I watched it in 1992. Whereas far too many sci-fi films focus on explosions and space-battles that look like WWII dog fights, 2001 seemed clean and plot-driven to me.

            • by julesh (229690)

              2001 seemed clean and plot-driven to me.

              Of course, that plot could have been turned into a film that was only about half the length...

          • by alexhard (778254) <alexhard.gmail@com> on Thursday September 03, 2009 @02:46PM (#29302797) Homepage

            I'm sorry but I'm having a very hard time comprehending your post. Did you actually call Kubric's 2001 one of the worst movies you have ever seen?

            DOES NOT COMPUTE

            • by gbjbaanb (229885)

              no, I didn't. Just picked on one aspect that could have been ... how can I say this ... shorter.

              Its possibly the one film the director's cut version should have 30 minutes removed without harming the movie at all. (actually, I can think of a few others that that applies to, but not with the same intention :)

            • by selven (1556643)
              It was pretty bad. The interesting part only lasted about five minutes and it was just a collection of long, boring space scenes. Maybe I can't appreciate it without reading the book first but I can't see anything excellent about it.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by gad_zuki! (70830)

              Depends. By the time I saw it, I was told its an Important Film and Important People made it and Important Things happen because its Important Art. As such, its interesting to watch and comment on all the little things that happen and more or less take it apart in your head and sit back and enjoy the swirling lights because they are Important Art. I think for the average filmgoer at the time of release it must have been somewhat unbearable. The critics at the time either loved it or hated it. I think thi

              • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

                by smoker2 (750216)

                Lets just say its an acquired taste. Its obviously pretty heavily influenced by social conventions at the time. The entire landing sequence is more or less an homage to the drug-heavy counter-culture at the time.

                This.

                You realise that this was released before the Apollo landings ? There was nothing other than satellites and grainy B&W photos of earth. Then you associate lack of knowledge with drug use.But you treat the imagination of others like shit because they were too early ! Just you wait, grasshop

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Yvan256 (722131)

        Seinfeld 2049?

      • Would you pay to see a story about a guy who went about his day in the future and didnt have any problems or anything interesting happen to him?

        Yes.

        I've watched documentaries. I've watched Seinfeld, I've been through the disneyworld ride where you see the appliances of the future many times. I'm a geek, this is our custom.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Maniacal (12626)

        futureguy: I am using my future toilet
        futureguy: I am driving my futurecar
        futureguy: I am sleeping in my futurebed

        Oh great. They're still using Twitter in the future? Shoot me now.

    • by DaveV1.0 (203135)

      Actually, this is one of my major complaints about a lot of popular sci-fi.

      The plot can usually be summarized as:

      mainstream science does something stupid, endangers the [city|nation|world|universe] only to be saved by the maverick genius scientist who no one believed

      or

      Scientist(s) create a [virus|bacteria|nanomachine|etc] which [escapes|is released] and now threatens everything. The day is saved by some competent and very smart guy with no training.

      It seems to me that a lot of science fiction has an anti-sc

      • by Kell Bengal (711123) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @01:03PM (#29301401)
        I think that's because some much sci fi (as distinct from space opera) invariably invokes our fears and anxiety to make compelling stories, rather than developing sophisticated drama. If it's just a story about something sciency, then something must go wrong somewhere in order for there to be conflict; it writes itself. Contrast that to Star Wars and Star Trek, where the science involved is a tool - starships and lasers and space stations - but the conflict comes from personal, character driven scenarios which require forethought and pathos.

        I don't think that catastrophe sci fi is anti-science, I just think it's easier - it's the 'disaster movie' equivalent.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by pla (258480)
        The plot can usually be summarized as:
        ...
        It seems to me that a lot of science fiction has an anti-science bent.


        You could just as well say that all non SciFi has the same problem... Govenrment wants to do something stupid and only the maverick politician can save the day; Spouse does something stupid and only two hours of dramatic avoiding-the-real-problem can reunite the couple; Boy wants girl but it takes 90 minutes of wacky adventures and two near-death experiences before he gets the courage to ask her
      • speaking of popular scifi, this is why I like SG1 - the plots are at least somewhat original. For instance, i watched this last night: SG1 (a secret gov't program) gets a crank call from an over the top conspiracy nut who actually gets some details right. On further investigation, he's a freaky conspiracy nut with info he really shouldn't have and by the end of the show, he's an alien soldier deserter who had an attack of conscience and was being drugged to keep him quiet.

        One of the things they did right o

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      At this point in human development we've got a name for fiction based around a non-dystopian future... it's called fantasy.

      • by elrous0 (869638) *
        I love many dystopian stories (they're entertaining and often enlightening), but the idea that dystopia is historically inevitable is foolish. Everyone ALWAYS thinks the end is at hand. And yet humanity keeps on progressing in spite of it all. Sure there have been some setbacks, but we've made it through tens of thousands of years now and we're still here, doing better than we've ever done before. You can find the guy walking through any era in known history who's carrying the "The End is Nigh" sign. And it
        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          The problem with your idea is that we are running out of certain natural resources. It will however be interesting to see (assuming I'm reincarnated enough times or something) what happens with the upcoming ice age.

    • by COMON$ (806135)
      I was about to list a bunch of movies, but I then realized that the movies in which tech goes horribly wrong tends to be in the minority so an article on such things would be rather boring. However, a article on genetic engineering viewed in a good light in movies...now there would be a hard find.
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn.gmail@com> on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:09AM (#29300041) Journal

    What's mostly wrong with the corridors in Stanley Donen's Saturn 3 (1980) is that the floor-surfaces resemble the base floor of a movie studio, something which had plagued the corridors in the medium-budget Star Wars three years earlier (more on Star Wars corridors in a moment).

    The movie that has an opening fight sequence in a corridor and later corridor after corridor on the death star followed by another fight sequence in a prison block corridor only leading up to the-equivalent-of-Jesus getting lightsabered in half in a corridor adjacent to a docking bay .... and you say "more on Star Wars corridors in a moment."

    And the second movie? Hoth ice corridors. IV, V & VI are so dependent on corridor shots.

    Did you mean to say "The Corridors of Star Wars article will be out later today with a 58 page thesis on the strength of corridor running and combat between rebels and imperials in the Star Wars cinema"?

    • by commodore64_love (1445365) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:17AM (#29300139) Journal

      A friend of mine who films his own movies has a corriodor in his basement. He says that corridor is one of his primary sets.

      The same was true with Trek. If they weren't on the bridge, they were in some damn corridor. One of the things I liked about DS9 and Babylon 5 was that they had lots of "open" sets, and tried to avoid corridors as much as possible.

      • by DaveV1.0 (203135) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:55AM (#29300605) Journal

        You can't really fault Trek for having so many corridors when most of the shots occur on the ship. If the space ships of Star Trek are anything like U.S. naval vessels, then they are mostly corridors connecting rooms. The rooms will be cargo, berthing, galleys, a few work shops, engineering, and the bridge. If the ship supports fly ops, it will have a hanger and flight deck.

        The important thing is that there will be no "open" decks. Everything will be enclosed, much like a modern submarine. Space will be at a premium due to life support considerations, so rooms will be small and packed together. Plus, depending on how long it takes to get around, there is the matter of food and water storage, recycling systems.

        In ST:TOS, the Enterprise would often be "three weeks out" from the starbase of the week. It had a crew of about 1,000. So, the ship had to have enough food, water, and air for 1,000 people for three weeks. Even with the "replicators", there would need to be source matter to create the food from. Let us not forget waste handling. Ejecting it from the ship means loss of material, water, and air. Storing requires voids. Recycling it requires space for the recycling equipment.

        Also, a ship moves through space so it must have engines and fuel. The bigger the rooms, the bigger the ship, the more mass the ship has, the bigger the engines and the more fuel it needs.

        Most people forget many of the details required for life because those details are taken for granted on a planet.

        Corridors are the natural result of building large space ships with large crew compliments. Even a large cargo vessel will be some huge empty spaces for the cargo and a large space for engineering both connected to a small crew section which will be mostly small rooms off of corridors.

        • by moose_hp (179683) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @12:27PM (#29300967) Homepage

          [...] Even with the "replicators", there would need to be source matter to create the food from. Let us not forget waste handling. [...]

          You just solved both problems with the same solution.

        • by Denial93 (773403)
          I disagree. The whole ship could be remote controlled by FTL subspace communication, which is available in that universe. But even if you accept the presence of a large number of meat-bodied crew, they wouldn't need to be housed in such an inefficient fashion, let alone to cross those unneccessary distances on foot.

          Of course this makes no sense because Star Trek wasn't made with realism in mind. But that is also true of your reasoning about how it is "natural" there would be corridors.

          All in all, the corr
        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          In ST:TOS, the Enterprise would often be "three weeks out" from the starbase of the week. It had a crew of about 1,000. So, the ship had to have enough food, water, and air for 1,000 people for three weeks. Even with the "replicators", there would need to be source matter to create the food from. Let us not forget waste handling. Ejecting it from the ship means loss of material, water, and air. Storing requires voids. Recycling it requires space for the recycling equipment.

          This problem is solved.

        • by drinkypoo (153816)

          In Trek only two things really seem to take up any significant space: power generation and long-term/reliable data storage. Unfortunately, they haven't figured out how to run their consoles on light in the future, so people are always getting zapped on the deck. (Cars from the 1960s used fiberoptics to centralize light sources, and today we can retrieve information back from that channel... what're all these conductors doing on the bridge?) Oh, and of course, warp drives.

          On the other hand, trek spaceships s

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by cpt kangarooski (3773)

          In ST:TOS, the Enterprise would often be "three weeks out" from the starbase of the week. It had a crew of about 1,000.

          No, it was usually somewhat more than 400, IIRC.

        • Corridors and hallways are symptoms of bad design, actually. You put them in places where you don't want to bother figuring out how to arrange the rooms so you don't need them. But they're a waste of space and building materials if there aren't factors built into the design which necessarily require hallways (many same-sized rooms, for instance): They're rooms that have no function other than to connect other rooms.

          Now, the place where corridors have a great place is literature where they provide a visual

        • Even with the "replicators", there would need to be source matter to create the food from.

          The source matter is probably poop.

          Did you know that Soylent Brown is made from feces? Feeeceeeesss I tell you!!!!!

  • by BigHungryJoe (737554) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:13AM (#29300093) Homepage

    Event Horizon! Can you imagine trying to walk down that hall with the walls spinning around you?

    Of course, maybe Event Horizon doesn't actually qualify as science fiction.

    • by SQLGuru (980662)

      Does the suspension bridge in Black Hole count as a corridor?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by polymath69 (94161)

        What about the corridor of chompers in Galaxy Quest? Just imagine trying to wheel a food-service cart or carry an antigrav-attached magnetic bucket of antimatter down that one...

    • by ettlz (639203)
      Now come on, any film with the word "tensor" in the script counts as sci-fi.
    • by raddan (519638) *
      We used to watch that film in college to intentionally scare the crap out of us. It was the one movie that didn't seem to lose its creepiness on repeat viewings.

      But there was one part that's always bugged me-- and it's the same thing that bugs me about Sunshine-- and that's the open pools of fluid (water? coolant? whatever?). What kind of asshole engineer has open pools of fluid on a spaceship? Sure, in both of those movies, there's artificial gravity (eh, such a cop-out, but OK), but, hey, artificial
    • Now this was one cool corridor [iann.net] -- only it took you on a loooong trip.

  • SyFy? (Score:5, Funny)

    by ONOIML8 (23262) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:14AM (#29300105) Homepage

    Don't you mean a syfy corridor?

  • Sci-Fi (Score:5, Funny)

    by Broken scope (973885) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:18AM (#29300161) Homepage

    Cause in the future we don't have cable management or flimsy plastic plates to cover up sensitive equipment and sharp corners.

    • Re:Sci-Fi (Score:5, Informative)

      by jbeaupre (752124) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:34AM (#29300405)
      Have you seen the ISS? The future is looking pretty organized. http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/177653main_UTBI1.jpg [nasa.gov]
      • Re:Sci-Fi (Score:5, Insightful)

        by egburr (141740) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:59AM (#29300665) Homepage

        Well, once you invent artificial gravity, you're back to having to have dedicated floor space for walking, standing, sitting, etc. And when your habitat expands beyond just a six person capacity with everyone knowing everything, to a large community where people have specialized tasks, you will probably not want to have everything just sitting out in the open like that for people who don't know what they are doing to accidentally bump things on their way by and not know how to correct it. And when your habitat grows beyond just a few small rooms, you will have to have dedicated travel (dare I say it?) corridors, that are just that, corridors.

        When your entire environment is very small and contains a very few smart, well-trained people, you can make use of every available space like they do on the ISS.

        • by geekoid (135745)

          No your not, becasue you have artificial gravity. Who says it can only be on one wall?

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Holy Jebus. I knew all those Sci-Fi shots of people sailing gracefully through corridors in zero-G was a myth. I always thought people would just bump into stuff, but now I know that it's because you'd most certainly get an arm or a leg caught in something.

      • by raddan (519638) *
        How'd you get that picture of my office?
      • Have you seen the ISS? The future is looking pretty organized.

        My God.

        How are you supposed to navigate that, in zero G, without constantly breaking things, pulling cables out of place etc.

        I'm surprised noone has been garotted by those cables yet.

        It looks like a disaster zone.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Spad (470073)

      And we have an entire infrastructure of pipes dedicated to moving steam around every ship or building complex, for some reason.

      • by jbezorg (1263978)
        Well... um... you see.. when traveling faster than the speed of light, the corridor light just sort of pools to form a slurry that moves to the back end of the ship. Those pipes are used to pump the light slurry to the front of the ship so people can see.... Um... yeah... still needs some work.
  • by bigmaddog (184845) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:29AM (#29300319)

    ...for the space toilet special. An interview with George Lucas will explore the challenges of sci fi pooping, creating believable multi-species lavatories that account for physical as well as cultural differences, whether Jedi excrement has any force abilities, and the problems traditionally associated with merchandising this under-developed aspect of cinema.

    • by Chris Burke (6130)

      Literally LOL.

      That post gave me the image of a constipated Luke Skywalker sitting on the john and straining, when Obi Wan's voice comes to him from beyond saying "Luke! Use the Force! Let go!"

      Followed shortly by a cut away to this [st-v-sw.net]

      • That post gave me the image of a constipated Luke Skywalker sitting on the john and straining, when Obi Wan's voice comes to him from beyond saying "Luke! Use the Force! Let go!"

        A few more that come to mind:

        "Thats no moon!!!!!!"

        or

        "This isn't a cave!!!!!!"

  • by damburger (981828) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:31AM (#29300357)

    Dear god, I thought I was alone.

    Corridors are the unappreciated bedrock of science fiction. I guess the original reason is because they could be repeatedly used for different parts of a ship/space station/alien planet, but they've taken on a life of their own.

  • I would think the "meat grinder"-like "containment corridor" from Event Horizon would be a great example for that article, but it's a no-show.

  • Non standar ones (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gmuslera (3436) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @11:43AM (#29300513) Homepage Journal
    Like the ones in Cube (and se/pre quels) that separate one room from another, short, high, but usually was enough to give a hint on what is forward, or at least see the fate to the first one that went in. Or the one in Coraline (ok, is no sci-fi, but probably qualifies as a "special" corridor).
  • Am i the only one that doesn't want to see people walking around for 10mins of a 50min show! The worst offence is opening a scene showing somebody silently walking into a room from a corridor, in a 2/3hr film this isn't too bad as it can be used to set the scene (i'd still rather they didn't), but if you add up the time people walk about in a series like Stargate SG-1 it's got to be about a 1/5 of the show!!! I distinctly remember the lack of corridors on firefly as one of the reasons i loved the show!

  • The liberator had corridors of POWER( and cardboard)!!! They were all lit up and meant business!!!!

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      When a Sci-Fi corridor is mentioned I instantly think of old series Dr. Who. They were all flimsy and cheap, but they were interesting to look at and it always seemed like half the story involved the Doctor and/or an assistant running through them.

      • by canajin56 (660655)
        The very earliest Dr. Who serials, on occasion, dedicated an entire half hour episode to cutting back and forth between the Dr. + companion, and another group, both walking through corridors or caves on the way to meet up. Sometimes they wouldn't even be talking, just a 5 minute shot of them walking and stepping over debris.
      • I'll bet you're a big fan of 'The Invasion of Time.'

  • lonely asocial men, obsessed with the appreciation of dark tubes where magical things happen

    sometimes a corridor is just a corridor?

  • It is interesting that the subject of corridor brought these two things to mind.

    The first place i read about the sci fi corridor was in a set of books written using Walt Disney characters in a a space setting. IIRC, they were written at a high level for the demographic, and one of the favorite words was corridor. It took me a while to determine what a corridor was. The character were always going up and down corridors.

    I really enjoyed many of the corridors in Dr. Who. Not so much the tardis, but the

  • by wisebabo (638845) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @12:44PM (#29301185) Journal

    The best corridors were from the movie 2001. In it we have:

    - The long corridor connecting the crew module from the propulsion system on the Discovery. Note it was octagonal in section and had no up or down as it was only to be accessed in zero-g.
    - The short corridor/connector in the shuttle to the moon where the mod space stewardess walks in and, thanks to the tricks of a rotating set and fixed camera, travels up the wall onto the "ceiling" and exits. (She is supposedly held on by her velcro shoes).
    - The short connector on the Discovery which is where the non-rotating main part of the space-craft meets the rotating part of the crew module. The astronauts must float down it and then clamber down a spinning opening to the part of the spacecraft that has artificial gravity. This is also another great "corridor", here Stanley Kubrik built basically an enclosed ferris wheel and in some memorable shots, had his astronauts jogging all around the "wheel".

    Amazing what you can do with a script that isn't pseudo science and a director who cares (and has a good budget!).

  • Satellite of Love (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Vohar (1344259)

    I'd have to say my favorite Sci-Fi corridor is always going to be MST3K's during the transitions between sketch and movie.

    "Oh no we've got MOVIE SIIIIIIIIGN!"

  • by Biff Stu (654099) on Thursday September 03, 2009 @12:57PM (#29301335)

    Just as people currently endeavor to recreate the manufacturing methods for medieval stained glass or the great pyramids, the people of the future will be awestruck at the ability of 20th and 21st people to make such smooth walls out of the mysterious and amazing material known as drywall.

  • Outstanding (Score:2, Insightful)

    by P. Legba (172072)

    ...the only thing I've read better than this article today have been the Slashdot responses.

  • ... and is using it to create and render 3D objects in the past couple weeks. The first major thing he created in full detail was (I kid you not), a sci-fi corridor. :-)

"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." -- Bullwinkle Moose

Working...