This page contains responses to my original Usenet posting in 1985.
Click here to see responses to my Back to the Future from 1997 and later.
From gatech!masscomp!trb Mon Aug 19 19:33:32 1985 To: ut-sally!kelvin Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Kelvin, Charles Fox is Grammy-winning songwriter. Klling Me Softly was his biggest pop hit, mostly he does theme songs like Love American Style and Happy Days. I don't think he's ever played in front of the cameras. --- Andy Tannenbaum Masscomp Westford, MA (617) 692-6200 x274
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 85 00:31:23 pdt From: seismo!lll-crg!vecpyr!amd!tc (Tom Crawford) To: ut-sally!kelvin Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Hey, no more movie reviews, OK? Tom Crawford ...amd!tc
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 85 12:25:11 pdt From: Paul Asente <asente@Cascade> To: kelvin@ut-sally.UTEXAS.ARPA Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Pay no attention to your detractors. Don't stop posting reviews. Your reviews are the best thing about net.movies. -paul asente
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 85 20:46:11 pdt
From: topaz!packard!allegra!fluke!moriarty (Jeff Meyer)
Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler)
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Again, sir, thank you! These are EXTREMELY funny (at least, I find them
so), and so here is a positive vote for continuing them. The false screen
credits for Fox and Lloyd were particularly good...
How many letters do you think you'll get saying "Fox/Lloyd wasn't in <.>!"?
If you want to start a pool, I'd say 18.
"Strong men blench! Women scream! Children vomit!"
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 85 18:39:54 edt From: John M Sellens <ihnp4!watmath!jmsellens> To: ut-sally!kelvin Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario :-) :-) :-) :-) I like the credits - but when are you going to review one of Coppola's ( _E.T._, _Raiders_of_the_Lost_Tarp_ ) movies?? Keep it up - some people have no sense of humour ... John
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 85 09:58:33 edt From: Chuck Mosher <gatech!mcnc!unc!cm> To: ut-sally!kelvin Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Your weakest "review" yet. Really liked the others. Don't push too hard.
From trudel@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Jon) Sun Aug 18 23:04:01 1985 Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Organization: Sirius Cybernetics Complaints Planet #2 > _Back_to_the_Future_ > > by Kelvin Thompson > _Back_to_the_Future_ is a bad, confused movie. If there are any doubts > that Hollywood is still rife with drug abuse, this movie can lay them to > rest. > The movie seems to concern a middle-class high school student, Charles J. > Fox (_Sixteen_Candles_, _The_Breakfast_Club_, _Weird_Science_)... > ... the scientist's DeLorean sports car... Well, that's it. I'm not going to read any more of these stupid reviews. Why, you ask? Well, this one is the most pointless of all. I think that whoever is running this AI program must also have had a few bits permanently grounded. First of all, let me be one of the first of thousands to point out that it is Micheal J. Fox. Sure, it was an attempt at humor to confuse two young actors, but it falls flat, ok? Also, the AI database is showing with lack of data surrounding DeLoreans (it probably only has : DeLorean-see Drugs, Cocaine). It must have locked in on this factor and blamed any minor discrepancies of the film with the Hollywood drug environment. Great. Tell us something we don't already know. > The only conclusion the viewer can draw is that _Future_ is the most > drugged-out movie since _Caddyshack_. Well, this shows more gaps in the database-What about all those Cheech and Chong movies? Perhaps it is the only other movie entered into the database that also had a reference to cocaine. If there is a Kelvin, why doesn't he step forward? I'll tell you. There isn't. Kelvin is the result of a lot of programmers down in Texas. I always wanted to know why Kelvin never rebutted the critics of his/her/its reviews, and now I'm positive I know. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. No more. --- Jonathan D. Trudel "You can't fight in here, this is the WAR ROOM!"
From kwc@cvl.UUCP (Kenneth W. Crist Jr.) Tue Aug 20 09:10:15 1985 Subject: Kelvin Organization: Computer Vision Lab, U. of Maryland, College Park This is for whoever is/are Kelvin Thompson. I did not read your 1984 review, because I was not interested in the movie. I did read your A New Hope review and you fooled me. I really thought you were serious and that you had not understood the movie. Later postings to the net (yours and others) showed me the error of my thinking. When you reviewed Casablanca, I had by this time written you off as some one who was trying to get cheap gratification from making a few people mad at you. I read the review to see what you had to say, and found my ideas were still confirmed. Your last review though on Back to the Future was just plain stupid. If you were trying to inject a little satire in your other reviews, you really flopped with this one. Why don't you just stop posting your reviews, because hopefully most people will stop reading them. Charles J. Fox, really Kelvin, couldn't you have done something better than this? Kenneth Crist Computer Vision Lab University of Maryland
From briand@tekig4.UUCP (Brian Diehm) Tue Aug 20 12:22:44 1985
Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler)
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
> > _Back_to_the_Future_
> >
> > by Kelvin Thompson
>
> > _Back_to_the_Future_ is a bad, confused movie. If there are any doubts
> > that Hollywood is still rife with drug abuse, this movie can lay them to
> > rest.
>
> Well, that's it. I'm not going to read any more of these stupid reviews.
> Why, you ask?
Unnh, no, I didn't need to ask. -ed.
> If there is a Kelvin, why doesn't he step forward?
*** REPLACE THIS MESS WITH KELVIN'S LINEAGE ***
Of course. Kelvin is a cute version of Kelvinator, the warped appliance of
a robot producing this stuff. Actually, if you look upon Kelvin's "reviews"
as a form of humor. . .
{ Just Sagans and Sagans of line feeds }
. . . they're still pretty sophomoric.
Actually, I'm really glad "Kelvin" CAN'T step forward - mobility in such a
juvenile AI entity would indeed be a frightening thing!
-Brian Diehm
Tektronix, Inc. (I'm NOT an officer of the company, so the company is NOT bound
by anything I say or sign. . .)
From kimery@wdl1.UUCP (Sam Kimery) Wed Aug 21 10:06:01 1985 Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Organization: Ford Aerospace, Western Development Laboratories > > _Back_to_the_Future_ > > by Kelvin Thompson > If this is supposed to be funny why isn't posted to net.jokes? I for one am tired of this BS. Maybe it should go to net.movies.attempted.humor. by.reviewer. Sam
From masuma@drupa.UUCP (Masuma Rahman) Fri Aug 23 22:19:11 1985 Newsgroups: net.movies Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver Here's a little "advice" to all net.movies readers . . . I'm sure we all know by now that "Kelvin Thompson" is a hoax. You see, there are a lot of wierdoes out there, and the above mentioned name represents one of the WIERDEST!!! I really couldn't care less whether it is one "misguided, deprived-of-attention" person, a group of silly youngsters or an AI experiment. But I AM getting extremely bored of all the wasted time, energy and postings on him (flames etc). So here is what I suggest. PLEASE ignore him!!!! Like a brat who acts bratty just to get attention, if you ignore him, with any luck he'll eventually crawl back under his rock. Even if you read his stuff (I know there is a very irresistable curiosity to find out how awfully stupid people can be!!) please don't give him the satisfaction of knowing that you did. "BE REAL QUITE . . . MAYBE IT'LL GO AWAY!!!"
From kitten@hao.UUCP Sun Aug 25 16:25:04 1985 Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO > Kelvin Thompson writes: > > _Back_to_the_Future_ is a bad, confused movie. If there are any doubts > that Hollywood is still rife with drug abuse, this movie can lay them to > rest. > [...] > > The producer of _Future_, Steven Spielberg (_The_Godfather_, > _Apocalypse_Now_, _One_From_The_Heart_) has built a reputation as one of > the "cleanest" filmmakers in Hollywood, but this incoherent, uneven movie > shows that even he has succumbed to the terrible drug dependency that > continues to ravage Hollywood. ** I'm sorry I had to leave in so much of the above article in my summary, but this is ridiculous! I get that you didn't want to go to this movie in the first place, and had it already condemed. Really now, you must have the attention span of a three year old to have missed so much. To enjoy a movie, you must *watch* it. Try discussing dinner plans before or after, and get to the movie early enough to get the popcorn before hand. And don't forget to use the potty at intermission, too. Then, maybe, you'll enjoy the film, and won't go home to your keyboard flaming movies, actors, and directors as 'drug crazed'. Really, now, we're all adults here...aren't we? (boy, my first counter-flame! that felt good - except for the singed paws)
From moriarty@fluke.UUCP (s) Sat Aug 24 16:59:15 1985
Subject: Re: Kelvin
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Just a short note so as not to waste your time or mine: I really enjoy
Kelvin's reviews, and hope he keeps them up. They're quite enjoyable, and
some of the best writing on the net since Ken Ardnt disappeared (from my
notice, anyway). Can't figure out why so many people are irate over his
stuff...
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
From dtuttle@uw-june (David C. Tuttle) Sun Aug 25 00:25:17 1985 Subject: In Defense of Kelvin Thompson Organization: U of Washington Computer Science >>>>From: kelvin@ut-sally.UUCP (Kelvin Thompson) >>>> <a satiric review of...> _Back_to_the_Future_ >>> >>>From: trudel@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Jon) >>>From: kwc@cvl.UUCP (Kenneth W. Crist Jr.) >>>From: kimery@wdl1.UUCP (Sam Kimery) >>> <people telling Kelvin where he can stick his reviews> >> >>From: masuma@drupa.UUCP (Masuma Rahman) >> <just ignore him, and he'll go away...> > >From: fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA > ...I really enjoy Kelvin's reviews, and hope he keeps them up. > They're quite enjoyable... Can't figure out why so many people > are irate over his stuff... Thank you, Mr. Moriarty, sir! I quite enjoy them, too... Gee, it's good to know I'm not alone in liking Mr. Thompson's reviews. WHY does this bother people so?!? Is it just intolerance of another's opinions? Is it anger in having been "duped?" One of the above people stated, "...Fool me twice, shame on me." Certainly that is no reason to blame HIM! Now that you know the score, you can avoid his reviews. It's that simple. If it hurts when you read it, then, by golly, DON'T READ IT! Leave it for those of us who can enjoy a refreshingly different point of view. As for his actual existence, I think it's safe to say that Mr. Thompson is exactly one human being of that actual name -- that is, if he's the same guy I knew as a CS undergraduate at Rice who worked as Backpage Editor of the _Thresher_ (campus newspaper), and judging from his reviews, I'm pretty sure it is... :-) ============================================================================ David C. Tuttle "Fool me once, shame on you..." Computer Science Dept. University of Washington
From evan@petfe.UUCP (Evan Marcus) Sun Aug 25 16:42:41 1985 Subject: Re: In Defense of Kelvin Thompson Organization: Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls, N.J. I'm not going to restate all the conflicting opinions, just restate my own. I thoroughly enjoy KT's reviews, and hope that he keeps them coming. If you are one of the fuddy-duddies (sp??) who doesn't like them, there's a special key on your keyboard just for you... it's located between B and M, and just below H and J. USE IT!!!!!!!! I might suggest the Kelvin consider moving or (dare I say it?) cross-posting to net.bizarre, where he would be much better received. --Evan Marcus P.S. Moriarty: Ken Arndt still posts to flame about once a week. -- Kids, remember, please don't try stunts like this at home.
From briand@tekig4.UUCP (Brian Diehm) Tue Aug 27 12:25:27 1985
Subject: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler)
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
In article <1715@hao.UUCP> kitten@hao.UUCP writes:
> Kelvin Thompson writes:
>>
>> _Back_to_the_Future_ is a bad, confused movie. If there are any doubts
>> that Hollywood is still rife with drug abuse, this movie can lay them to
>> rest.
. . .
>> For example, one moment Fox is driving around in a parking lot, then the
>> viewer turns to his girlfriend to talk about dinner plans and looks up to
>> find the student staring at a farmer in the middle of nowhere. Later,
>> when the viewer returns to his seat with some hot dogs and popcorn, he
>> sees a strange, seemingly incestuous conversation between Fox and his
>> mother (maybe his sister?). Still later, after the viewer has moved to a
>> better seat, Fox is in a concert hall playing electric guitar, even
>> though he was banned from the concert early in the film. And all through
>> the movie, whenever the viewer looks up from trying to quiet the baby he
>> is sitting, he notices all sorts of inconsistent details: the town square
>> looks completely different in different scenes; the same people will
>> sometimes drive recent-model sedans and later drive dated jalopies; and
>> characters' ages and relationships to one another seem to shift randomly.
>I'm sorry I had to leave in so much of the above article in my summary,
>but this is ridiculous! I get that you didn't want to go to this movie
>in the first place, and had it already condemed. Really now, you must
>have the attention span of a three year old to have missed so much.
>To enjoy a movie, you must *watch* it.
>
>(boy, my first counter-flame! that felt good - except for the singed paws)
And to enjoy satire, one must *read* it! Really, I know it takes intelligence
to enjoy satire, but I never realized that it took so much intelligence just to
*recognize* it! Apparently you are not alone in lacking that, as many on this
net have missed the blatantly obvious.
-Brian Diehm
Tektronix, Inc. (Who not only doesn't CARE about Kelvin Thompson, they corpor-
ately have never even HEARD of him!)
"Tell me more, *Future Boy!*"
From nancy@enmasse.UUCP (Nancy Werlin) Fri Aug 30 17:16:22 1985 Subject: Re: Re: _Back_to_the_Future_ (spoiler) Organization: Enmasse Computer Corp., Acton, Mass. > ** > I'm sorry I had to leave in so much of the above article in my summary, > but this is ridiculous! I get that you didn't want to go to this movie > ... I think that the article you were flaming was submitted as a joke. In normal writing, since one does not normally identify every joke with a smiley face (perish the thought), you learn to judge sarcasm/humor/irony by tone. Tone can be conveyed by written language, you see, as well as through voice. The writer of the review to which you took such exception, in my humble opinion, does so superbly. Of course, writers of his ilk are rare on the net. Since we are not used to reading USENET articles carefully, it is difficult to pick up the nuances when they are present -- especially if the writer isn't obliging enough to identify every joke as such. These writers are throwbacks, it's true; but they do still exist, irritating though it is. You might learn to appreciate jokes such as this movie review -- jokes which amuse through the delicate use of language -- if you practised reading some of the works of ancient humorists. For a start, I suggest S.J. Perelman. Of course, you cannot read Perelman on line, you must visit your library and take out a book. You can find your local library by consulting the yellow pages of your telephone directory (another book, which is not unlike a file listing that you could generate on your computer). Alternatively, visit a bookstore. Fondly, Nancy Werlin EnMasse Computer Acton, MA
Jump to: responses to Back to the Future web page in 1997 and later | review of Back to the Future | home page | contact info
(Updated August 23, 1998.)