One of the very most excellent episodes of X-1, with top-notch music and sfx, as well as us being fortunate enough to have a clear enough recording to really appreciate the audio engineer's obviously skillful work upon it. It's quite interesting to compare and contrast this story with Ray Bradbury's famous "A Sound of Thunder". Both are stories about big-game hunters who travel back in time to hunt dinosaurs, but this one is much more of a big-game-hunter story, and much less of a time-travel story (notably in that this story says that paradoxes just magically can't happen, while that one is all about how the future can be changed by actions in the past, no matter how carefully you try to avoid it). I would not be a bit surprised if little Ray heard this episode (or read the text it's based upon) at a formative age, and decided to create "Thunder" as his own version of it. The fact that this one places so much emphasis on the idea of British-style "big cats and elephants" hunting, a nineteenth-century recreational practice which was already extremely old fashioned when this story came out...and meanwhile, the later Bradbury tale is more interested in its time travel, with that subject being a very 21st-century one, given our ever-expanding sphere of media influence (meaning both that we're more familiar with time travel as a concept, due to an ever-increasing number of blockbuster movies about it, as well as simply the fact that we have more of a concept of how much everything changes across time, due to having so much more recorded history fothe past couple centuries than our ancestors had about entire millenia before them)...it's a very intriguing dynamic to ponder.
Unfortunately, de Camp (or the scriptwriter) is confusing herbivorous sauropods with meat-eating therapods. Tres distracting for dinosaur enthusiasts like myself. Great story otherwise.
@@royjacksonjr.4447 I had the same reaction, but remembering my childhood dinosaur science anew, it's actually not wrong. "Therapod" is a more specific term for the carnivorous dinosaurs, but "sauropod" is an umbrella term which inclues both them and the "brontosaurus" types. The actual definition of "sauropod" is simply that it has a particular type of hip structure, which is true of both of these categories, while excluding the other half-to-two-thirds of dinosaurs that all have a different hip structure (notably the ceratopsians and stegosauroids are of that other type, whose proper name I forget).
It’s fun (for me) at bedtime w/ eyes closed imagining & setting myself in these episodes. I know, I guess it’s silly but I enjoy it before falling asleep.👍✌️
Major Payne Me, too! Love to listen to SF audiobooks at bedtime...I have awesome dreams listening to them! I stopped watching TV well over 5 years ago & don’t miss it a bit!!!!
Like others here, I like this episode as well. This and Frank Quattrocchi's _Sea Legs_ are two favorites of mine. There was a cadre actors who were compelling in these episodes. Wendell Holmes played the thoroughly unlikeable _James_ in this drama but has played serious, funny, whimsical characters in others. Thanks for uploading.
they say sauropod when referring to the scavengers at a carcass, this was a accident i believe. In the book they use the correct word theropod, sauropods were the long necked herbivorous dinosaurs previously seen in the story. Theropods are the two legged carnivorous dinosaurs that dominated the Mesozoic and eventually gave rise to birds.
This is not actually a mistake. "Therapod" is a more specific term for the carnivorous dinosaurs, but "sauropod" is an umbrella term which inclues both them and the "brontosaurus" types. All therapods were sauropods, but not all sauropods were therapods.
@@grendel8342 I was referring to the order Saurischia, which is all dinosaurs with that particular hip structure (the other one is apparently called Ornithischia). I was under the impression that Sauropoda and Saurischia were two different names for the same category, and it appears I was mistaken about that one fact. That hardly amounts to me "not understanding philogeny" in general however. I would recommend being more precise and less unnecessarily hostile in your future criticisms; it will improve the resulting outcomes for you noticeably.
@@quicksilvertongue3248 nothing I said was hostile and I was perfectly precise. Tone is hard to tell over text so this tells me you seen this as an argument to be had rather than a discussion. And I was specifically referring to wording in the book vs the audio drama, while also clarifying the difference between the two groups of animal being referred to in my comment.
@@grendel8342 "you don't understand" is ALWAYS hostile. If you think someone is legitimately absent knowledge through no fault of their own, you allow them to take the initiative in asking for the information they don't have, whenever they want it. But instead, you're saying that they're an ignorant inferior and that you need to educate them, like a missionary trying to save the souls of the pagan savages.
No, it very obviously has different temporal mechanics than that one...they may coincidentally both be stories with the same (slightly outdated, given modern attitudes about sport hunting) plot premise, or one of them may have been a deliberate variation upon the other, due to differing authorial intent.
85 million years later and it’s still a good story ❤.CHEERS BIG EARS.
One of the very most excellent episodes of X-1, with top-notch music and sfx, as well as us being fortunate enough to have a clear enough recording to really appreciate the audio engineer's obviously skillful work upon it.
It's quite interesting to compare and contrast this story with Ray Bradbury's famous "A Sound of Thunder". Both are stories about big-game hunters who travel back in time to hunt dinosaurs, but this one is much more of a big-game-hunter story, and much less of a time-travel story (notably in that this story says that paradoxes just magically can't happen, while that one is all about how the future can be changed by actions in the past, no matter how carefully you try to avoid it). I would not be a bit surprised if little Ray heard this episode (or read the text it's based upon) at a formative age, and decided to create "Thunder" as his own version of it. The fact that this one places so much emphasis on the idea of British-style "big cats and elephants" hunting, a nineteenth-century recreational practice which was already extremely old fashioned when this story came out...and meanwhile, the later Bradbury tale is more interested in its time travel, with that subject being a very 21st-century one, given our ever-expanding sphere of media influence (meaning both that we're more familiar with time travel as a concept, due to an ever-increasing number of blockbuster movies about it, as well as simply the fact that we have more of a concept of how much everything changes across time, due to having so much more recorded history fothe past couple centuries than our ancestors had about entire millenia before them)...it's a very intriguing dynamic to ponder.
My favorite x minus one episode. I wish it was remade somehow.
Yeah GREAT episode 😄
Unfortunately, de Camp (or the scriptwriter) is confusing herbivorous sauropods with meat-eating therapods. Tres distracting for dinosaur enthusiasts like myself. Great story otherwise.
@@royjacksonjr.4447 I had the same reaction, but remembering my childhood dinosaur science anew, it's actually not wrong. "Therapod" is a more specific term for the carnivorous dinosaurs, but "sauropod" is an umbrella term which inclues both them and the "brontosaurus" types. The actual definition of "sauropod" is simply that it has a particular type of hip structure, which is true of both of these categories, while excluding the other half-to-two-thirds of dinosaurs that all have a different hip structure (notably the ceratopsians and stegosauroids are of that other type, whose proper name I forget).
It’s fun (for me) at bedtime w/ eyes closed imagining & setting myself in these episodes. I know, I guess it’s silly but I enjoy it before falling asleep.👍✌️
Major Payne Me, too! Love to listen to SF audiobooks at bedtime...I have awesome dreams listening to them! I stopped watching TV well over 5 years ago & don’t miss it a bit!!!!
Not at all "silly", but possibly quite "selig", an older Germanic or Middle-English word meaning "blessed".
@@quicksilvertongue3248 👍
Own thousands of hours of OTR and this is one of my favorites. Brilliant.
I would listen to this on the radio when I was a kid and the bonehead sound at 11:37 scared the crap out of me!
\
Great visuals you added...better than a slide frozen throughout!
Excellent story! One of my favorites. Story by L. Sprague DeCamp
I just hear it twice on my xm satellite radio this is the best story over all I love my dinosaurs
It takes some good imagination to make these So sad the television had been void of that seems like forever
Great choices of art in the video, bro!
Like others here, I like this episode as well. This and Frank Quattrocchi's _Sea Legs_ are two favorites of mine. There was a cadre actors who were compelling in these episodes. Wendell Holmes played the thoroughly unlikeable _James_ in this drama but has played serious, funny, whimsical characters in others.
Thanks for uploading.
they say sauropod when referring to the scavengers at a carcass, this was a accident i believe. In the book they use the correct word theropod, sauropods were the long necked herbivorous dinosaurs previously seen in the story. Theropods are the two legged carnivorous dinosaurs that dominated the Mesozoic and eventually gave rise to birds.
This is not actually a mistake. "Therapod" is a more specific term for the carnivorous dinosaurs, but "sauropod" is an umbrella term which inclues both them and the "brontosaurus" types. All therapods were sauropods, but not all sauropods were therapods.
@@quicksilvertongue3248 so you don't understand phylogeny it seems. Sauropoda is a specific order of non ornithischian and non theropod dinosaurs.
@@grendel8342 I was referring to the order Saurischia, which is all dinosaurs with that particular hip structure (the other one is apparently called Ornithischia). I was under the impression that Sauropoda and Saurischia were two different names for the same category, and it appears I was mistaken about that one fact. That hardly amounts to me "not understanding philogeny" in general however. I would recommend being more precise and less unnecessarily hostile in your future criticisms; it will improve the resulting outcomes for you noticeably.
@@quicksilvertongue3248 nothing I said was hostile and I was perfectly precise. Tone is hard to tell over text so this tells me you seen this as an argument to be had rather than a discussion. And I was specifically referring to wording in the book vs the audio drama, while also clarifying the difference between the two groups of animal being referred to in my comment.
@@grendel8342 "you don't understand" is ALWAYS hostile. If you think someone is legitimately absent knowledge through no fault of their own, you allow them to take the initiative in asking for the information they don't have, whenever they want it. But instead, you're saying that they're an ignorant inferior and that you need to educate them, like a missionary trying to save the souls of the pagan savages.
A little "Plan 9" in the soundtrack. Good story
This is really good. 👍🏿
Really good listen!
My 11 y/o grand son acted like he was not really into the story but that change when the dinosaur made that noise. I love these old shows
this sounds so much like A Sound of Thunder. still good.
Awesome.
Is this story perhaps set in the same Universe (one of them, anyway) wherein Bradbury's A Sound of Thunder takes place?
No, it very obviously has different temporal mechanics than that one...they may coincidentally both be stories with the same (slightly outdated, given modern attitudes about sport hunting) plot premise, or one of them may have been a deliberate variation upon the other, due to differing authorial intent.
SiriusXM
bought me here
:) I imagine the time machine as the TARDIS....
ok