robertsl@stolaf.UUCP (Laurence C. Roberts) (08/28/85)
You nitwits who are defending Kelvin Thompson are doing it all wrong. I think Kelvin Thompson is a nogood p**pyb*tt. He is really unsophisticated and immature and should go back where he came from. He's a nincompoop who can't even tell good movies from bad ones. I side with all the grownups who say he doesn't know what he's talking about. In fact, I learned some passwords and managed to crash his computer, so you won't have to worry for a while about dumb ol' Kelvin. These are my opinions, and you can't have them, so there!!! Laurence "Dont-call-me-Larry" Roberts ...ihnp4!stolaf!robertsl "Your mama, your daddy, your bald-headed granny!!!" P.S. Would one of you numbskulls mail me the most recent review? St. Olaf was down computerwise.
halle@hou2b.UUCP (J.HALLE) (08/28/85)
There's another reason why Kelvin stinks. He can't tell the difference between what is and what could have been. He's right about Casablanca, it is one of the worst of all time. But that's because of the cast. If the studio had gone ahead with its first choice for the two leads, it could have been the greatest movie ever. And Kelvin did not even point this out. A deficient review if I ever saw one.
render@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA (08/29/85)
Written by robertsl@stolaf.UUCP: > I think Kelvin Thompson is a nogood p**pyb*tt. He is really > unsophisticated and immature and should go back where he came from. He's a > nincompoop who can't even tell good movies from bad ones. I side with all the > grownups who say he doesn't know what he's talking about. In fact, I learned > some passwords and managed to crash his computer, so you won't have to worry > for a while about dumb ol' Kelvin. I will assume that this is an attempt by someone who thinks he is clever to post a satirical response in the manner of Kelvin Thompson. You have succeeded. It sucks. (God help us all if this guy is for real!) I am not a fan of Thompson, but seeing the latest postings concerning his reviews, I have to defend him. Some people on the net seem to find KT a lucid, amusing writer. Others (myself, included) do not. He is attempting something which is very difficult to do well and an aquired taste at best. If you enjoy his writing, good for you. If you do not, ignore him. If no one likes him, it will soon become obvious from the total lack of response. If he does this purely for attention, this will halt his reviews. If, on the other hand, he is serious about writing satirical reviews, he will work to improve them. This would hopefully lead him to correct what some see as flaws in his writing, and he could possibly become a widely-liked contributor. Lord knows we could use a good satirist or two on the net. Now, can we stop spouting off about Kelvin Thompson and get on with it? Hal Render {pur-ee, ihnp4} ! uiucdcs ! render render@uiuc.csnet render@uiuc.arpa
cjbiggin@watmath.UUCP (Colin Biggin) (08/30/85)
Laurence C. Roberts writes: >You nitwits who are defending Kelvin Thompson are doing it all wrong. > >I think Kelvin Thompson is a nogood p**pyb*tt. He is really >unsophisticated and immature and should go back where he came from. He's a >nincompoop who can't even tell good movies from bad ones. I side with all the >grownups who say he doesn't know what he's talking about. In fact, I learned >some passwords and managed to crash his computer, so you won't have to worry >for a while about dumb ol' Kelvin. > >These are my opinions, and you can't have them, so there!!! > > Laurence "Dont-call-me-Larry" Roberts > ...ihnp4!stolaf!robertsl > My my, aren't we the facile ass today. OK, I won't call you Larry, how does idiot, dolt, shit-head, and peabrain sound instead. You think Kelvin sounds immature... you should have reread this piece of refuse that you just sent. As to your opinions, you can keep them and shove them in unmentionable places as well. As to Kelvin's brilliant satirical reviews which are the only interesting things in this newsgroup, I for one enjoy them very much. They are INOFFENSIVE and FUNNY. Let me stress the word INOFFESIVE for you Larry since it seems you can't comprehend meanings and subtlety very well. INOFFENSIVE means not harming (or offending anyone). Kelvin's articles are mere potshots at well known and well liked movies. Hence, (I think) amusing... They shouldn't offend anyone but for some unknown reason, they do. >P.S. Would one of you numbskulls mail me the most recent review? St. Olaf >was down computerwise. Sounds like you crashed your own system instead of Kelvin's... not surprising! First you criticize Kelvin and now you want a copy of his latest review. Not only are you an over-sensitive pansy-ass, but you're a hypocrite as well.. Once again, I like Kelvin's reviews and will continue to read them. I personally don't see anything wrong with them except perhaps a slightly inappropriate (or is it unappreciative) newsgroup... but there is no net.satire so this IS the appropriate newsgroup... cheers, Colin Biggin cjbiggin!watmath!{allegra|clyde|ihnp4|utzoo} University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario
steve@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Steve Holtsberg) (09/02/85)
PLEASE PLEASE stop complaining about/defending Kelvin. It's bad enough to have to hit the 'n' key for his reviews, without having to do it for his critics. Maybe create a new group- net.movies.kelvin :-)
preece@ccvaxa.UUCP (09/06/85)
> First you criticize Kelvin and now you want a copy of his latest > review. Not only are you an over-sensitive pansy-ass, but you're a > hypocrite as well.. /* Written 6:45 pm Aug 29, 1985 by > cjbiggin@watmath.UUCP in ccvaxa:net.movies */ ---------- I THINK the flame at Kelvin that you were responding to was meant as satire in the same vein as Kelvin's reviews. This isn't particularly more clear than that Kelvin's reviews aren't the work of the total moron that they superficially appear to be, but I think the request for the latest was specifically mean to be a give away of satirical intent. I suppose maybe your response was also meant in the same way. Sigh. Who cares. I still think it's a pretty dumb form of humor ("Hey, look how dumb I am! Aren't dumb people funny?!"), but at least it's not pompous... -- scott preece ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (09/17/85)
In article <16304@watmath.UUCP> cjbiggin@watmath.UUCP (Colin Biggin) writes: >Laurence C. Roberts writes: >>You nitwits who are defending Kelvin Thompson are doing it all wrong. >> >>I think Kelvin Thompson is a nogood p**pyb*tt. He is really >>unsophisticated and immature and should go back where he came from. He's a >>nincompoop who can't even tell good movies from bad ones. I side with all the >>grownups who say he doesn't know what he's talking about. In fact, I learned >>some passwords and managed to crash his computer, so you won't have to worry >>for a while about dumb ol' Kelvin. >> >>These are my opinions, and you can't have them, so there!!! >> >> Laurence "Dont-call-me-Larry" Roberts >> ...ihnp4!stolaf!robertsl > >My my, aren't we the facile ass today. OK, I won't call you Larry, how >does idiot, dolt, shit-head, and peabrain sound instead. You think >Kelvin sounds immature... you should have reread this piece of refuse >that you just sent. The man was satirizing some of the not-so-nice reactions to Kelvin's reviews. Geez, I hope no one else took him seriously. Sean -- - Sean Casey UUCP: sean@ukma.UUCP or - Department of Mathematics {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean - University of Kentucky ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA