Talk:The Blob
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Films, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to films and film characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||||||
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
 |
This article, category, or template is part of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to horror film and fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page. Please feel free to add your name the project participation list and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale. |
| Article | This article is a Article. |
Interestingly enough, in a Venus comic from around the early 1950's, Venus and Thor faced an entity called the Creeping Death that had many similarities to the Blob.
[edit] grey goo
I don't see much, if any, connection between grey goo and the Blob (there's a sentence I never thought I'd type!), so I removed it Am I missing something? - DavidWBrooks 01:56, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Why not ask, then if you still think the same way, open it up for discussion? Yes, I think that you are missing something. Here's a question for you. How did "The Blob" get bigger? Are you assuming it was bigger because it's gut was fuller and fuller with dead people etc? Or are you assuming that it grew bigger? If it grew bigger, please explain the mechanism. --Couttsie 09:40, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- (Can't believe we're debating this) However it got bigger - and remember, it's fiction! it's a gooft made-up story! - it had nothing to do with nanotechnology, the concept of which was three or four decades in the future. - DavidWBrooks 12:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I know it's fiction, I'm a fan of the movie (I like gooft made-up stories) :-)
The concept of nanotechnology originated in 1959, as per the article
The first mention of some of the distinguishing concepts in nanotechnology (but predating use of that name) was in "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom", a talk given by physicist Richard Feynman at an American Physical Society meeting Caltech on December 29, 1959
So The Blob is only 1 year younger than the concept of nanotechnology. However, before you object, the word was not really popularised until Engines of creation by K. Eric Drexler. I agree that the makers of the The Blob did not envisage or anticipate nanotechnology. I agree that The Blob is not grey goo, though read the article on ecophagy.
However, unintended as it was, The Blob is a perfect example of green goo, which is what I said in the first place.
I propose a compromise. What do you think of this?
"Unintended as it was at the time, The Blob is a also a perfect example of green goo (and of alien origin)"
The way The Blob grows by absorbing its victims is through biological nanotechnology, which is green goo. --Couttsie 04:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that seems reasonable. - DavidWBrooks 14:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think any of the above suggests any relationship, of any kind, between The Blob and the biotech concept of green (or even gray) goo. Here is the section which I have removed:
- *Unintended as it was at the time, The Blob is a perfect example of green goo (and of alien origin). Green goo is a biotechnology variant of grey goo.
If any form of biotechnology is in the plot line (even in speculation by a scientist in the script), let's cite that. If not, let's not have this somewhat speculative note in the article. --Tony Sidaway 06:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
