Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Full headers:
From: Lewis <>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire For "Justice League" Review
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:36:50 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Miskatonic U
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <slrnp1r7li.1mdf.g.kreme@jaka.lan>
References: <ova1d5$8gq$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 17:36:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info:; posting-host="3c197d0c3347940ea1a3152d60d9bc59";
logging-data="25815"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/CGBiQFTJgfEbEFn9UpBPd"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Darwin)
X-Face: )^b5"R:T7U>9~:PEn3YkzMfW*[b1qKeU.fP9C8~8HpU9}lA&6`bH1z
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NPXIgTUb85xTYbOndfLQ/3powT4=
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
Print Article
Forward Article
In message<> Ed Stasiak<>
>> Alan Smithee
>> More than just a kerfuffle over one superhero movie, the incident raises 
>> larger questions about the relationship between reviewers and the 
>> public, the editorial objectivity of aggregators and how much studios 
>> should be empowered to control the pre-release messaging of their films. 

> Not at all, it’s called the 1st Amendment.

No it is not.

> The movie studio can simply stop providing preview viewings to critics
> if they don’t like what they’re saying.

They can, if they are spectacularly stupid.

By the way, I think you might be the prettiest girl I've ever seen
outside the pages of a really filthy magazine