Message-ID: <2727@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Jul-83 15:33:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.2727
Posted: Fri Jul  1 15:33:00 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 7-Jul-83 11:28:38 EDT
Lines: 30

From:  Gregory Faust 

     I went to see Twilight Zone: The Movie on opening night here in
Boston.  In general I liked it, although I would not label it
stupendous.  After I say the movie, I saw a review of it on TV by
Siskel and Ebert (sp?).  I agree with the major observation that they
made, but disagree with the conclusion.  Namely, I agree that the
first two vignettes are not as "entertaining" as the last two.  From
this they conclude that the movie was not up to par because "with all
that Twilight Zone tradition, you would expect that they could come up
with four good episodes".  The problem here is that while the first
two were slightly less entertaining, it is hard to say they were not
as "good".  Especially given that the first two are more in the TZ
tradition.  They both deal more with human nature and the fairness of
bizarre twists of fate as did most of the TV episodes.  The last two
vignettes have the viewer more on the eadge of their seat and are less
predictable, but draw their strength more from special effects than on
insights into human nature.

     In addition to the four vignettes their is also a small beginning
and ending sequence featuring Dan Akroyd that is fairly amusing.
     
     Since I don't want to discuss plot (because of spoilers), I will
end by giving my ratings of the four vignettes separately and then of
the movie as a whole based on a system of 1-5: (4, 3, 5, 4) and 4 as a
whole.  As an aside, it is interesting that the second vignette was
the one directed by Spielberg and was the least good, although it is
the one that is arguably the most TZ-like.

Greg