david@bragvax.UUCP (David DiGiacomo) (07/23/84)
I was disappointed with the latest "At The Movies". Siskel and Ebert
both gave "thumbs-up" to "Electric Dreams", which is obviously too dumb
to be bearable for anyone who has so much as played Lunar Lander on a
VIC-20. It makes me wonder if these guys use manual typewriters at
work-- or if Gene expects his word processor to fall in love with
him after reading his column. I also expected some mention of earlier
movies on a similar theme ("Demon Seed", anyway).
The next review was "The Last Starfighter" (Siskel gave it thumbs-up,
Ebert thumbs-down). I was again disappointed, this time because the
computer graphics connection was not even mentioned. Granted, special
effects technology should not be the basis for a movie review, but TLS
is a landmark and should be recognized as such. Also, I think that the
presumably large numbers of home computer owners mentioned above might
well be interested in seeing the movie as a long Cray demo.
--
Please mail-carrier, bring back my person! (non-sexist version)wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (07/25/84)
The St. Louis TV Guide claimed that Siskel & Ebert were going to review the films cited in the base posting in last week's show, and a different set in this week's show. Neither of the Guide listings corresponded with what was actually shown. I can't recall what was on last week, but this week was "The Doctors are In", a special in which they discussed how the careers of some actors (Al Pacino and others) could be better if they chose other parts. So what's going on? Where are the shows we should be seeing here? Why would some markets get one show and other markets get a different one?
moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (07/27/84)
I can't say I'm all that upset... I don't expect them to realize when
good/bad computer references are made in films. Generally, I watch 'em
because I know their reactions to films well enough to predict if I will
like the movie (I generally side with Gene (thaht's the thin wun, son!)).
I have noticed, though, that Roger is getting rather touchy lately. Going
through his period?
"DANGER is my BUSINESS"
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPAkmo@ptsfa.UUCP (Ken Olsen) (07/28/84)
<>
I believe that Siskel and Ebert have become too big
for their britches since they got on Network TV.
They may be decent critics, but they take themselves
as the be-all and end-all of cinema commentary.
Ken Olsen
{ihnp4,ucbvax,cbosgd,decwrl,amd70,fortune,zehntel}!dual!ptsfa!kmo
"Harold is the most dangerous of animals - the *smart* sheep."moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (08/06/84)
>Ebert is also getting rather LARGE ... Gain of water weight before `.' ?
"The fog is getting thicker..."
"And EBERT'S getting LLLLAAARGER..."
DIM! (DIM of the YARD!)
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA