Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decuac.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!decuac!avolio
From: avolio@decuac.UUCP (Frederick M. Avolio)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: Baby - short review
Message-ID: <493@decuac.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 13:11:25 EST
Article-I.D.: decuac.493
Posted: Thu Apr 25 13:11:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Apr-85 02:47:24 EST
References: <8742@microsoft.UUCP> <5258@tekecs.UUCP> <4956@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Organization: ULTRIX Applications Center, MD
Lines: 22

>> There are very few "family" movies produced these days. ...  I am glad
>> to see a movie such as "Baby" produced as an alternative for children
>> to such movies as "E.T.", "Gremlins", and "Star Wars." I appreciate
>> the dilemma faced by many of my friends with children who have trouble
>> finding ...
>
> The dearth of children's films is indeed disturbing.  I find it
> incredible that trash like the Smurf movie and the Carebears movie can
> rake in the bucks because no one else is interested in providing
> quality children's films.

   As a parent with very young kids (3 1/2 and 2) I am looking ahead to
the day when they are old enough to sit through a 2 hour movie and
suspect I'll be buying a VCR and renting things like Mary Poppins, The
Swiss Family Robinson, The Absent-minded Professor, and Debbie Does
Dallas. (Just kidding on the last ... wanted to see if you were paying
attention.) And I, too, was horrified to see so many parents with their
real little kids in tow to see real "kiddie-nightmare-producers" such as
Temple of Doom and Gremlins.  (RE. The Carebears Movie, my house rule:
no movies or TV shows based on toys will be viewed!  The idea!)
-- 
Fred Avolio      {decvax,seismo}!decuac!avolio      301/731-4100 x4227