From Tue Aug 15 18:57:56 EDT 1995
Article: 72282 of
From: (Imperator)
Subject: Re: review: Arrowhead (plus a lot of weird imperial bureaucracy)
Date: 15 Aug 1995 16:06:56 GMT
Organization: Overcome by Paranoia
Lines: 114
Message-ID: <40qgn0$>
Status: RO (Frans Postma) responded to one of my responses :-)

>> Note for those not following the Private series closely:
>> "Arrowhead" is  the #24 of the Private Film series ("The
>> Tower 3" was #23).
> And #25 just arrived (_Apoclypse Climax_) with Melissa Hill, yeah!

Is that a sequel to "Arrowhead"? (i.e. are the crew the same idiots?).


>>> Rating: 3.20
>> You are too lenient. Rating: 1.85. All the marks are due to
> Hmmm, that would make it not worth a rental and you would miss all
> those nice girls. Didn't you think it was worth a rental? It's not a
> movie you'll see again-and-again all right, I agree on that.
> (this also proves that you should not review movies immediatly after
> you saw them, I'll try to remember that)

You are right on both counts. Of course, this was not a review and it WAS 
right after I watched thre movie (I always wait for a few days before I 
start compiling the reviews to ensure objectivity (yeah, right! :-)). 
I'll revise the rating to 2.00 i.e. bordering between:

"Sucks as much as the average American rental" and
"Rent only if you are really, REALLY fond of the gals in the cast, AND 
you have cash to burn"

Speaking of the ratings I have decided to make the following 
clarification to the Imperial system that has always been at the back of 
my mind:

0.00-1.00 are the really vile crap. The some total of Leisure Time falls 
here as do the excessively botched "normal efforts" (Ninn, Nymphette does 
Hollywood). You should consider yourselves real experts if you only 
suffer one or two tapes of this range every year.

1.00 is the rating of the average 90s one-day wonder cheapo with 4 
ordinary (i.e. no outdoors, no 3somes, no raunch) b-g's and 1 g-g. The 
range 1.00-2.00 should NEVER be rented knowingly, but you are bound to be 
trapped (usually due to the boxcover) many times in your renting career.

2.00 is the rating of: (a) the average 90s rental with some aspirations that 
fell through, OR (b) the average Silver Age (1984-1988) one day wonder. 
Usually, 2.00's of type (a) have tremendous casts and tremendous waste of 
resources and so are annoying. B-type 2.00s are usually enjoyable and 
quite honest.

The range 2.00-2.50 is already described.

3.00 is  the rating of the average Golden Age film that does 
not fall in the masterpiece >3.35 category. A good example of this type 
is a non-Swedish Erotica Seka flick. The average decent budget Euro, or 
the average extreme raunch Euro is also a 3.00

A note on the Ages according to Me. Note that like all historical 
divisions these are approximate :-).

-The Golden Age is 1976-1984. I have slightly extended it from the 
traditional 1977-1982 to include "Misty B." and the many excellent movies 
of 1984. The Golden Age ends with the retirement of Annie and the rise of 
Ginger (not that it was Ginger's fault of course :-)). The fringe period 
is great fun, since it includes the first Angel&Ginger flicks and Bridgette 

-The Silver Age (my real sentimental favourite) should strictly be 
1984-1986, i.e. up to the retirement of Ginger and Traci, but 1987-1989 
had many nice movies with essentially the same stars as 1984-1986, so 
I'll include 1988.

-The period 1988-1995 can be divided and named in many ways. A friend 
calls it the Cheapskate Age or the Crap Age, but it is innaccurate since 
it ignores Leslie&Stagliano. The term "Silicone Age" only applies to 
post 1992 IMHO. The term Neon or Pretentious Age for 1989-1992 does 
include most of Blake, but it really disregards the rest of the crap... I 
mean the material :-). So, my opinion is that the traditional apellation 
of "Iron age" is the best and safest.

Ok, now I got going with my bureaucratic pronouncements, let me go a bit 
further :-)

In the matter of Silly Cones, there can be only 5 PGALW (Personality Goes 
A Long Way) Pardons at any time. Mine of course, being Imperial, have 
more weight than those of you mere mortals :-). In any case, I would be 
interested to hear yours. Note that these are PERSONALITY pardons, not 
"She makes me horny, so we'll forgive her" ones :-). That means Raven 
does not qualify, nor does Victoria P.

Mine are:

-Crystal W.
-(tentative) Juli A.

Juli is only tentative because I realized that I have had an overdose of 
her and have got a bit sick of seeing her.

Number 5 I keep as a trump card. Shane has a lot of personality (of the 
vacuous coed type -I love that) but a whole damn Imperial Pardon is a bit 
too much. Let her roast :-). Sandra Scream certainly shows that PGALW, but 
her boobjob is also very good so she really doesn't need a pardon. Leena 
has personality bu, though it has gone a long way, it has not gone ALL 
the way to forgive her terrible job.

All right, batch run is over, so enough with the idle thoughts and 
schemes. Back to work.