From: utzoo!hcr!tugs Newsgroups: net.movies Title: re: net.film Article-I.D.: hcr.163 Posted: Thu Jul 15 09:49:03 1982 Received: Thu Jul 15 10:21:25 1982 My 'n' key isn't broken, and I think additional or sub-newsgroups are a much-needed change to net.movies. Bruce McLean wan't exaggerating when he referred to having to wade through a hundred ST II letters, half of which seemed to be from people who didn't know why a female lieutenant would be called "Mister". Doesn't this kind of - dare I say it - trekkiness deserve a separate group? ET, Star Trek, Blade Runner and Tron were NOT the only movies released this summer, but they do have several things in common: they are all SF films (please, no mindless flames about the accuracy of my classification) and they all generated copious amounts of correspondance which, in my opinion, ceased to be concerned with the cinematic aspects (I hope that doesn't sound too ivory tower: I'm referring to general movie talk, like reviews, warnings and those questions that keep you awake at night) of the films and began to show a fixation that suggested the films had ceased to be entertainment and were now a way of life... (Isn't this guy finished yet?) So what I'm really trying to say (at last) is that the idea of a net.movies.followup, or of specific film subgroups (net.movies.STIITWOK) would be marvellous. Par ticularly as it woudn't entail segregating any group of films (hey, I liked Blade Runner and the others too...), but would provide a means of channelling off the talk when it developed (degraded?) to the point where it was intended for people with a special interest in or affinity for certain films. 'Nuff said. Steve Hull decvax!hcr!tugs