Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site haddock.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!haddock!jimc
From: jimc@haddock.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: _Perfect_  (spoiler)
Message-ID: <13900046@haddock.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Jul-85 19:01:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: haddock.13900046
Posted: Wed Jul  3 19:01:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 6-Jul-85 10:10:44 EDT
References: <2248@ut-sally.UUCP>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:ut-sally:-224800:haddock:13900046:000:1274
Nf-From: haddock!jimc    Jul  3 19:01:00 1985


OK, gang, he let it slip.  Kelvin Thompson used the term
"Orwellian" in this review, and I have not heard of anyone using
that word without having heard of the book *1984*.  Apparently
he's been playing with our minds in publishing all these bogus
reviews.  So, what do we have here?  The obvious plot of
*Perfect* is to follow John Travolta's pursuit of a career goal
and the personal entanglements which result.  Obviously, the
movie is not meant to be a means by which "nerds" can find sexual
gratification in laying eye on Jamie Lee Curtis's gorgeous body.

Again, I have to hand it to you, Kelvin; not since Thomas Hardy
have I seen anyone take such pains to sustain such dry satire.  I
must say it is quite impressive.  I get a good laugh every time I
read one of these things.  At first, that review of *1984* had me
very confused.  Then came that review of *Star Wars* and boy!
what a hoot!  I have a feeling he gave us that one just to tell
us what's been going on.  Now we have this review of *Perfect*.
I think I'm going to start saving these reviews in my
miscellaneous directory.

You know, I think this is all funny enough for him to put together
an anthology of sorts, a la Leonard Maltin's.

			Jim Campbell
			...!{ihnp4, allegra, harvard}!ima!haddock!jimc