From: trotsky <>
Subject: Re: Good Time (US) 2017
Full headers:
Subject: Re: Good Time (US) 2017
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
References: <>
From: trotsky <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <_xXKB.49814$K_2.24050@fx07.iad>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2017 10:29:14 UTC
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 05:29:14 -0500
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3648109324
X-Received-Bytes: 2058
Print Article
Forward Article
On 11/2/17 6:00 PM, william ahearn wrote:
> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 6:53:56 PM UTC-4, alvey wrote:
>> That could also be due to critics writing things like; "[Good Time] is a
>> standard crime caper/heist movie featuring the kinds of twists, bad
>> decisions, and downbeat ending that often pass for an indie film’s fresh
>> take on the genre."

> Roger Ebert? Was it at a seance or a bunch of posers using his name? Critical response has been
positive notwithstanding some knucklehead at that website. But then again, you haven't seen it and
need someone to take up the slack of your usual uninformed drivel. Just another dickhead troll.

I can see why you complain here, it's not as if people will be lining up 
to continue the tradition you started with your fine film commentary, right?