Next <
Subject: Re: 2017 R.A.M.C-F Movie Ratings
Full headers:
From: Lewis <>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: 2017 R.A.M.C-F Movie Ratings
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 14:04:38 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Miskatonic U
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <slrnp2d9rm.ccv.g.kreme@snow.local>
References: <>
Injection-Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 14:04:38 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info:; posting-host="66db068922e5a18c3fb3c7a6ec599288";
logging-data="11491"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19LiSpl+UQb29k1B6ka+udr"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.2 (Darwin)
X-Face: )^b5"R:T7U>9~:PEn3YkzMfW*[b1qKeU.fP9C8~8HpU9}lA&6`bH1z
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JXY97IFAZhZIs14h2Kp+dpjRpqo=
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
Print Article
Forward Article
In message<> super70s<super70s@super70s.invalid>
> In article<>,
>  Michael OConnor<> wrote:

>> That being said, Gandhi was a better movie than the Best Picture winner 
>> from the year before, Chariots of Fire, which had no business winning over 
>> Raiders of the Lost Ark IMO.

> I've never been a fan of COF or Raiders, I would've picked On Golden 
> Pond or even Atlantic City over either of them (Reds is worth a watch 
> every now and then but I've never been that crazy about it).

Raiders is a very good film, artfully made. It may well be Spielberg's
best film. It is vastly underrated because it's an action/adventure, so
is immediately dismissed from even the possibility of being art.

And, while it was regarded as pretty good evidence of criminality to be
living in a slum, for some reason owning a whole street of them merely
got you invited to the very best social occasions.