Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!ut-sally!kelvin From: kelvin@ut-sally.UUCP (Kelvin Thompson) Newsgroups: net.movies Subject: Kelvin calls it quits: brief apology, then long commentary. Message-ID: <2868@ut-sally.UUCP> Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 02:02:24 EDT Article-I.D.: ut-sally.2868 Posted: Thu Sep 12 02:02:24 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 14-Sep-85 07:29:13 EDT Distribution: net Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas Lines: 117 That's all, Folks by Kelvin Thompson (yes, that's really my name) Well, I guess that last anti-review is pretty good evidence that I'm starting to pull some muscles, so I'm throwing in the towel before I lose any more friends. For those who are interested, I will give below some of the reasons I posted the anti-reviews in the first place and some observations about the net's responses to them. First, though, I'd like to apologize for the first few paragraphs of my _Purple_ anti-review. Too late, I realized that ludicrousness, if taken too far, becomes obscenity. Sorry. And now, some long, ego-feeding ramblings which many will no doubt wish to skip. WHY I POSTED THE ANTI-REVIEWS (in order of increasing importance): [1] To make a statement about the inherent ridiculousness of the movie review itself. Each viewer has a unique response to a movie, based on his or her unique set of preferences, biases, and tastes ... and yet some people -- sometimes one's friends and sometimes pseudo-oracles called Critics -- presume to predict how others will respond. If a single person can have two different reactions to a movie on two different days, how can a Critic predict how millions will respond? And other artsy- fartsy bullshit. [2] To vent some steam. I feel a terrible ambiguity about almost every movie I see, so I'm almost never willing to say that it's good or bad -- I just mumble, "Well *I* liked it," or "Some parts were okay, some weren't." It felt good to really cut loose on a movie without any namby-pamby qualifications. [3] To try to get legitmate points across (a few of times) and stir up discussion on real issues. For example: in _Brewster's_ I attempted to issue a trivia-ish challenge to the net; in _451F_ I tried to voice my disapproval for review-shortening suggestions that were being made. [4] To engender the pleasurable (to me at least) "Aha!" experience in people when they caught on, and amusement after they caught on. I did *not* post the anti-reviews to chuckle snidely at those who did not see the anti-reviews for what they were. [5] To gain fame and notoriety. [6] To see what the hell would happen. OBSERVATIONS: [1] How fast people caught on: I guess that all in all it turned out about as I expected, but in the heat of things I was amazed at some of the responses. I originally planned to start out with somewhat believable reviews, then gradually get more and more ludicrous and see how fast people caught on. I started out pretty well to plan: _Futurekill_ was an entirely honest review, and I though that _Return_of_the_Soldier_ was beleiveable. But when I wrote _1984_ I just couldn't hold myself back, and I figured that the game would be up. Much to my suprise, however, only a couple of people caught on to _1984_, and some were apparently still in the dark as late as _Perfect_. Looking back, it doesn't seem so surprising -- some people did not read the anti-reviews as a sequence, and, read individually, a few might be marginally believeable. [2] Some reactions to (assumed) real reviews: I was interested to note that people responded much more vehemently to _Start_Wars_ than to earlier anti-reviews. A couple of Britishers merely "disagreed" with a patently prejudiced _Soldier_ review; many people helpfully pointed me toward Orwell after _1984_; I "overestimated" the role of the French government in _Partner_. But after _Star_Wars_ I got some extremely vicious responses, some of them containing outright personal attacks. Admittedly, the anti-review was pretty blunt at face value, but does any attack on a fictional, third-party entity, i.e. a *movie*, ever warrant such a response? Did I get these extreme responses because more people had seen the movie and hence made a bigger sample, or because some netters have a near-religious attachment to Star Wars? [3] Some reactions to anti-reviews: When I started out I figured that some would appreciate my anti-reviews and that some would find them not to their liking, but I thought that those in the latter category would simply skip over the articles. I was rather dismayed when several people told me to get off the net, and one person even threatened to get me kicked off. I *greatly* appreciated the favorable responses I received. [4] I've come to the conclusion that there are three basic ways one can view a movie incorrectly: (1) One is unwilling to accept what the filmmaker is trying to do (e.g. Ted Kennedy watches _Second_Blood_); (2) One does not see important aspects of the film; (3) One sees aspects of the film which are not there. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine which of my reviews emphasized which of these categories. [5] A couple of times, as I read a response to an anti-review that somebody had taken seriously, I would think to myself, "My God, some people will beleive *anything*." But then a little voice in my head would retort on the responder's behalf, "Yeah, but I can beleive *anything* about some people." Later, as I was going through a film review index doing research for some anti-reviews, I had an opportunity to read a lot of reviews, and I came across some real dogs. In case y'all haven't heard: there are some *stupid* reviews out there. And they are for real. THE FUTURE I don't think I'll be posting any more anti-reviews, nor do I plan to post any real reviews. However, I do expect to join in discussions on general movie topics, and next week I will post a very short Movie Fun Quiz. As himself, Kelvin Thompson kelvin@sally.UTEXAS.EDU {ihnp4,siesmo,ctvax}!sally!kelvin Oh yeah, some stuff I left out of previous postings: :-) ;-) (-: (-8 :-> <-;