From: alvey <alvey@is.invalid>
Subject: Re: _______ movie of the year
Full headers:
From: alvey <alvey@is.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.current-films
Subject: Re: _______ movie of the year
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 17:40:55 +1000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <wfqolyvkd5xs$.jllk7k4hjs71$>
References: <> <> <p2f721$t6$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="735bbee70756136aff4dd8724ab1ec4a";
logging-data="30430"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/LU7gEqQrVmFf740OCx+Nt"
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180101-2, 01/01/2018), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MXPeSHGyyrF/WhvskfsnBfoO60w=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:58:09 +1100, hector wrote:

> On 2/01/2018 8:24 AM, Michael OConnor wrote:
>> The 2017 film that people will still be watching and talking about in 50 years is:
>> Hard to say, my guess is either Dunkirk, or Blade Runner 2049.
> Dunkirk was a disappointment.

So was BR 2049. They re-captured most of the atmospherics but the plot was
far more complicated than the original. And Mr Practical Pedant would like
to know; What did the population of LA eat?