[net.movies] _Pale_Rider_

kelvin@ut-sally.UUCP (Kelvin Thompson) (08/04/85)

                            _Pale_Rider_
 
                         by Kelvin Thompson
 
 _Pale_Rider_ is bad.
 
 Mishandled grievously ... amalgam ... Eisenstein's _Old_and_New_ or
 Renoir's _Grand_Illusion_ ... shades into a meditation on the transcience
 of not so much life as existence ... an ideologically ambivalent
 dystopia.
 
 Less a devil than a walking conumdrum ... Jenny Agutter (_The_Eagle_Has_
 _Landed_, _Equus_) ... the muted rhetoric of naturalism ... supple zooms,
 pans, and tracking shots ... fascination with the tonalities of light ...
 serious new offering ... the Church is a curious and pervasive target
 here ... oddly comic pathos ... misanthropy as bold social criticism ...
 unsentimentally asserts that self-deception and paranoia are the
 accoutrements of survival ... a dispassionate mimicry ... individual
 selfhood.
 
 Or so it says.
 
 Illustration of how superfluous ... delineate its entrenchment ...
 shallow formulas ... don't add up ... misleads in suggesting a systematic
 development of story and theme ... sleekly condescending ... betrayed by
 the stage production ... beer belly ... awkwardly contrived ... degraded
 by stupid, shabby filmmaking ... exaggerated privatism.
 
 A reason is not so easy to pin down ... cannot have what it acutally
 needs ... wild Brazilian crooks ... curdled hatred and hysterical
 vengeance ... symbolic castrator ... tends to submerge the archaic ...
 destroys the viewer's confidence ... something has been demonstrated
 rather than grasped, felt, and conveyed.
 
 Mockery is still propoganda.

jeffh@brl-sem.ARPA (the Shadow) (08/06/85)

> _Pale_Rider_ is bad.
> 
> Mishandled grievously ... amalgam ... Eisenstein's _Old_and_New_ or
> Renoir's _Grand_Illusion_ ... shades into a meditation on the transcience
> of not so much life as existence ... an ideologically ambivalent
> dystopia.

AHA!!!  I knew it!  Kelvin Thompson is not a real person.  Kelvin
Thompson is just the code name used for an experimental program
at U of Texas to write critical reviews.  This would explain:

	1) Why Kelvin hasn't answered any of the many flames he (it)
	   has recieved.  [it isn't programmed to]

	2) Why every review starts out with "_Fill_in_the_Blank_ is a
	   bad movie."  [an obvious bug]

	3) Consistency problems:  like calling _Star_Wars:_A_New_Hope_
	   worthwhile in one place, and trash in another.  Or using
	   `Orwellian' after pretending not to have read _1984_
	   [not necessarily a bug. real reviewers are never consistent]


I must admit that it is nearly as good as most of the reviewers one
reads in the newspapers.  It says a lot for the future artificial
intelligence; we can make programs as stupid as real people!

The problem with this review must have come when the developers tried
to fix the "this is a bad movie" bug and broke something else.

> Mockery is still propoganda.

You betchum, Pale Rider!

		"Never argue with a fool ...
			People might not know the difference!"

				the Shadow
				ARPA:	<jeffh@brl>
				UUCP:	{seismo,decvax}!brl!jeffh

masuma@drupa.UUCP (Masuma Rahman) (08/07/85)

	Okay 'Kelvin' ( I don't believe that's your real name . . no one
in their right mind would post the stuff you post and reveal your true identity)
. . your reviews are getting boring.
	I just thought you might like to know you are letting down some
of your readers -- you see, they ( the reviews ) are getting sooooo 
predictable. C'mon, you can do better than that!!!!
	All your reviews seem to have the same (monotonous) tone . .
'take a passable to good movie, and give it a terrible review, just so
die-hard fans of those movies can get mad at you'.  That was an interesting
and even funny (sometimes) idea -- for a while.  But they are getting kind
of boring.
	So, here's a suggestion, why don't you take a nice, and worthless
movie, like _Tarzan, the Ape Man_ (with the Derek in it), and tell us how
intellectually and philosophically educational you have found it!!!  And 
give us some profound insights into the director's, actor's, actress's (!!)
minds!!!
	If nothing else (which they would be) they would be amusing to read . .
(unlike your most recent reviews on _Return_ and _Pale_).


					Amusedly,
					
					M.R.
					ATT-ISL, Denver