Film review, paw ratings don’t match

I think that the review and rating in The Roar are somewhat inconsistent. The “Footloose” review indicates that the movie is just slightly above the minimum of tolerable; the 3-star (well, paw) rating indicates that the movie is average, without much going for or against it. The rating should probably be between a 2 (bad, just not horrible) and a 2.5 (not very good, but with some [noteworthy] redeeming features).

That having been said, I totally agree with your criticism of the ’80s. The 1980s will probably appear in the historical as the nadir in 20th-century American culture: The movies were by and large idiotic, the pop music was abominable, and the clothing (oh, the clothing) doubtless reached the highest levels of tackiness and obnoxiousness possible without actually killing people.

I think most of the idiocy in the ’80s can be explained by mass euphoria. The ’80s were largely prosperous, and almost everyone in the middle and upper class (the poor, especially urban poor, could neither afford nor care for this nonsense) simultaneously went insane. Besides explaining the garish dress, this also accounts for how 90 percent of legal tender is tainted with coke, the feel-good drug of the ’80s.

Another ’80s remake that you should probably review is “Red Dawn.” In the original movie, the Soviets, Cuba and Nicaragua invade the U.S. (specifically, Calumet, CO), and a group of high school students resist the occupation with guerilla tactics. Now it’s North Korea doing the invading (it was changed from China for distributor concerns), but oops, the North Korean army’s a joke, so they’re making it a comedy instead.

— Brandon Bailer, sophomore