cad (04/14/83)
Since Mr. Tim Baloney (unc!tim) has already admitted that his devotional preferences are non-Christian, one can only assume from his latest belching in this group, that his movie preferences are equally heretical. While E.T. may have laid on the schmaltz a tad heavily, this in no way qualifies it as "utter garbage". Wake up infidel! E.T. is a great flick, for what it attempts to do, and if you can't understand that, then I, for one, feel very sorry for you. Still laughing about E.T. and Drew Barrymore screaming at each other, ---> Chuck A Degaul <---
tim (04/16/83)
One of the lowest things I have ever seen in any movie is wringing tears out of kids by killing the cute animal, then bringing it back to life so the kids won't leave thinking that death is something that really happens. That really made me sick. A variety of questions about the movie: If these aliens are really such great guys, why didn't they come back for him? Why did they make him rig an interstellar radio on an underdeveloped planet which had diseases deadly to those of his race? Why were there apparently *no* procedures for dealing with this sort of thing? Why didn't he just fly up a tree and wait a few hours for them to come back? Did his ship bring him back to life? Do you really think that a race which is capable of resurrecting a badly mangled body full of alien chemical agents would not be capable of building a Star Trek-style transporter? Why did that imbecilic bike chase go on so long when you knew the whole time that ET was going to magically fly them away when things got hairy? Why can't an interstellar race with the aforementioned medical technology keep their existence a secret from such an incredibly less advanced race? The evil, bad, mean, and nasty scientists killed ET, according to Elliot. This asertion is never challenged by any sympathetic character. Question: What should they have done? In summary, cute animal movies of this sort have never been good, will never be good, and probably can never be good. Tim Maroney
oz (04/16/83)
ENOUGH! E.T. was a great movie, ACCORDING TO YOU. TOOTSIE was a great movie, ACCORDING TO SOMEONE ELSE. Why the hell can't people on this net understand that liking or not liking movies IS A MATTER OF TASTE! HOW DARE ANY OF YOU TRY TO SAY TO ANOTHER, "YOUR TASTE IT WRONG!" For my part, DINER was great, TOOTSIE was fun, and THE PRODUCERS is the best movie ever made, but I am not going to lambast anyone for loving GIDGET GETS PREGGERS. Offer your opinions, YES, but don't tell anyone they are wrong for liking something. Please direct any corrections of my spelling (without comments on my message) to the wailing wall, any further comments on this subject should be discussed in net.flame. OZ seismo!rlgvax!oz
swatt (04/16/83)
I am reminded of a pithy comment that was a favorite of my high school chemistry teacher: As one Roman remarked on seeing another Roman kissing the north end of a cow facing south: "De gustibus non disputandum est" (about taste, there is no arguing). Yup. He had others, at least one of which had definite pedagogical value. How many of you non-chemists remember the ideal gas law? I do: PV = nRT (Pressure times Volume equals # moles times constant 'R' times Temperature) But of course I don't remember it this way, I remember it: Perfect Virture equals a Nauseously Rotten Time. Cheers. - Alan S. Watt
schwager (04/23/83)
#R:cbosgd :-342200:uiucdcs:10700027:000:265 uiucdcs!schwager Apr 22 19:56:00 1983 Why those dirty, nasty, unscientific movie-makers! Didn't they realize that some big kids would nit-pick their inaccurate movie to death? Tsk-tsk! I, for one, hope E.T. gets mugged and shot in the sequel. Then the little kiddies will get to see some realism....