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