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